Kurmedgeons

wannab@dis

Well-Known Member
amykissangel said:
(hopefully better than Winnie the Pooh and this Nemo musical)

I once read that Pooh had much better exit survey results than Mr Toad ever did... Maybe our resident CM with access to the surveys can let us know if this is true or not. My gut instinct is that it's true.

Also, how do you know that the Nemo Musical won't become the best show on property? It's not even done, so how can you claim to want something better?

I also love WDW and the thing I love the most is going back and seeing all the changes since my previous visit... sometimes in less than 6 months. Even though I may not always like every single change, I applaud Disney for attempting to keep the parks fresh and inviting for return visitors while still building the attractions to attract new guests.
 

Walter

Member
Original Poster
My intent was not about Horizons. That may be my avater, but not what I was talking about. The whole "rose-colored glasses" thing was what I was mentioning; I would not be upset with the parks as I am now if I hadn't been a fan earlier. Unfortunately, as good of a point as DarkBlue made, it's something that I'm not yet able to experience. I'm sure that, when I have children, they will adore it, and that is truly what Disney is for...the children. But it seems to me that I'm starting, already, to lose that feeling, when many of you still have it growing strong. I'm not trying to be self-centered, and I know that Disney must change with our current instant-gratification culture, but it makes me a bit sad. I gues it doesn't say so much about Disney, but more about our people. IMO, many of the rides that Disney has built lately have been sub-par, but that's just to my tast; I know that many love them. It's all a matter of taste really, but it seems like the whole franchise is trying to take a 180-degree change.

And, no, I didn't mean to insult anyone.
 

BuPhilo

New Member
I can certainly understand and empathize with the original poster. There are certain entertainment/recreational things in my life I enjoy so much that I often wonder whether I will enjoy as much the next time. (For me, that includes Chicago concerts, Drum Corp shows, and visinting WDW.) I usually pause about 5 or 10 minutes into any one of these things and kind of check with myself to see if all the pixie dust is still there. Happily, at the age of 41, all of these things still hold there power over me.

However, the very first attraction I ever experienced was the Enchanted Tiki Room. I remember being blown away little by little as I realized just how in depth and how detailed the show was. I remember clearly being so excited about what the rest of the Magic Kingdom (that's all there was back then) must hold in store for me! I guess I probably don't have to explain that for me, the renovation to "Under New Management" really put a damper on my enjoyment of the attraction. Whether anyone else likes or dislikes the new additions to the show, for me, it will never be the same. Understandable....

Also, I had the pleasure to work a summer at 20K back in college. I know I am not alone in missing that ride dearly. Poor effects and long lines aside, that was one unique attraction.

The poster is not a curmudgeon. He's nostalgic. So was a guy who started all of this......
 

Pongo

New Member
Joel said:
Do you seriously live your life blindly accepting things you don't like? I doubt it. So why should someone else "just accept" what they perceive to be a drop in quality at WDW?

People should certainly be open to change, but they shouldn't settle for a change for the worse. If they did, we would still be stuck with Journey Into Your Imagination (and hopefully the same will soon be true for JIIWF).

I don't blindly accept everything. But Mission: Space is something that can't be readily changed. So acceptance is something you're going to HAVE to do in this case. Accept or stay away. And if you don't accept, there's no use in openly complaining. They AREN'T going to bring back Horizons. They ARE going to keep Mission: Space right where it is. No matter how many people hate it. In fact, they are making an effort to plus it. It's getting better.

And you say that it's a change for the worse, but that's entirely a matter of opinion. Thrills are what sells these days. THAT'S why there is no longer Horizons.

And if you don't like the fact that thrills are wanted more than slow moving omnimovers past boring show scenes, then that's something you have to deal with all of humanity.
 

cloudboy

Well-Known Member
I think there are a couple of different reasons why you find yourself disappointed with Disney as it is today.

First, I think it has to do with how the animated features and other movies are ties in. It used to be (now this is talking a good 15 - 20 years ago now), that the parks were a different place. Yes there would be costumed characters all around, and Fantasy Land had rides based on the classic features, but other than The Tree House, the rides were not based around the movies. Today, you almost have to be familliar with the Disney movies to understand some of the rides. The cross marketing has gotten out of control. For what it is worth, EE is the great exception to this, but I one ride does not a trend make.

Second, the way rides are/were designed has changed quite a bit. Old rides were more about the settings and situation - new rides are more about emotional stimulus. I still adamantly contend that the original rides were designed less as a story and more as a setting, whether that was intentional or not. Newer rides are too structured - too limited by comlicated storylines, and as such have to resort to physical thrills and stimulants to create excitement.
 

Tigger1988

Well-Known Member
cloudboy said:
Fantasy Land had rides based on the classic features, but other than The Tree House, the rides were not based around the movies. Today, you almost have to be familliar with the Disney movies to understand some of the rides.

But aren't the Peter Pan, Snow White, etc rides all based on the movies?
 

Scooter

Well-Known Member
kachow said:
Yeah, I disagree on the generic merchandise comment. We generally found each park, and then each land had different stuff. Obviously all had the general WDW merch, but then there was usually stuff tailored to each land, plus some stuff tailored to and sold at specific rides. Regarding main street, I think stuff like that is more a necessity based on increasing popularity and attendence. It just starts to make more sense to have one big store than break things up into several smaller stores with seperate entrances that get jammed up. I still remember there being specific "candy shops," and "housewares," shops, etc, though.

I guess in my comments I didn't make myself clear..I'm sorry.
What I meant, for example was that years ago, when you walked into a Frontierland gift shop, you still felt like you were in the frontier. The Castmembers had on costumes from the old days, and the stores sold things like Raccoon skin hats and rubber bowie knives, and bow and arrow sets, and old replica flint rifles. They also sold old time candys in big glass jars. There were Indian headdresses and Cowboy and Indian Toys. I also used to buy Civil war soldier statues there.
Almost none of that Time period stuff is there anymore. The candy is that powdered sugar in a straw and Jelly belly assortments hanging on a wall. They sell Disney Toasters, and Mickey Mouse Alarm clocks, cotton candy in little Disney Bags and Rice Krispy treats there now.
It's still looks great on the outside and I still love Frontierland, but my wife and I don't even bother going into the shops anymore because you can bye most of whats in the Frontierland shops right on Main street now.
 

Epcot82Guy

Well-Known Member
cloudboy said:
I think there are a couple of different reasons why you find yourself disappointed with Disney as it is today.

First, I think it has to do with how the animated features and other movies are ties in. It used to be (now this is talking a good 15 - 20 years ago now), that the parks were a different place. Yes there would be costumed characters all around, and Fantasy Land had rides based on the classic features, but other than The Tree House, the rides were not based around the movies. Today, you almost have to be familliar with the Disney movies to understand some of the rides. The cross marketing has gotten out of control. For what it is worth, EE is the great exception to this, but I one ride does not a trend make.

Second, the way rides are/were designed has changed quite a bit. Old rides were more about the settings and situation - new rides are more about emotional stimulus. I still adamantly contend that the original rides were designed less as a story and more as a setting, whether that was intentional or not. Newer rides are too structured - too limited by comlicated storylines, and as such have to resort to physical thrills and stimulants to create excitement.

I agree entirely. I think there is a pretty large debate raging between Oct. 2 1982 and an entire change (just to use Epcot as an example). Instead, I think there is a large group of people that understand and appreciate development of new attractions, but they do so with an eye to both the past and the future. I remember as a child when attractions closed, for the most part it was replacement with something much stronger. An example: Mission to Mars to AE.

WDW has posed a new problem, though. It is the first resort where a very large portion of the current generation has lost what it grew up with. What I mean is that the people between 22 and 30 grew up with MK full and Epcot in its old form. For those that liked that (the majority of those on this board between that age), almost 50% of these parks are gone. DL on the other hand has maintained quite a bit of what it had. It always has had more of this focus because its market is full of annual passholders that want more of the same. WDW refocused its marketing to new guests. Therefore, it has changed, and mostly in response to what these new guests wanted.

I think there is a way to take what WDW used to be and create a new Disney off this foundation. It doesn't need to change, it needs to progress. That means keeping and maintaining what works, both in entirety or in part. The very recent developments are a huge step. Soarin', EE, I:ROE, etc. all go back to what I would have expected in the late eighties and early nineties.
 

slappy magoo

Well-Known Member
Without getting terribly nostalgic OR curmudgeonly, there have been (and still are, but with lesser success), Disney attractions that, while not necessarily educational themselves, celebrate a love of education. They weren't necessarily meant to teach, but to inspire the guest to learn more. That, to me, is the sense of wonder that was attempted with Epcot. The park was meant to be a testament to exploration. You might not remember thing one about The Living Seas, but it may spark an interest to pick up books on marine life, or watch a Nat. Geo. documentary or do something where you would eventually learn something. Ditto with Spaceship Earth, where you get an idea as to how far civilization has come, perhaps making you want to take a more active role in its future. Whether WDW lost that, or never really had it, is up to everyone's individual interpretation, but IMHO, that always seemed to be something to which Walt aspired, not to be the teacher but to plant the seed that makes someone want to learn. It's unfortunate that some people rebel against it, for fear that they might learn somethning whilst on vacation (and once in a while that includes me, so it's not like I'm trying to act like somne sort of culture snob on an effin' Disney forum, thank y'all very much), but that's the feeling I miss. Not the sensation of "Man, that was awesome," but of looking at a subject with fresh eyes, maybe even for the first time, and realizing I want to learn more. Part of it may be from being a misanthrope, cousin to the cantankerous. But maybe, it's a mindset Disney no longer really posseses, and that's a little sad. It's that sense of wonder that also inspires some people to want to become Imagineers, and thus inspire the next generation. Without it, WDW will keep changing, but I fear perhaps not for the better. I see more movie tie-ins and thrill rides, and less stimulating, thought-provoking experiences that will truly change the way you think of yourself.
 

Bravesfn1

New Member
wannab@dis said:
I really wish they would bring back Horizons...

Maybe then we could go for a day without the griping and complaining about how bad things are now and how they used to be so much better 20 years ago. Maybe they could even get some of you Horizons lovers to spot them a few million each to get it built and then all of you could staff it for free. Of course, you'd be bored out of your minds waiting for those other few 'stuck in yesterday' people to ride.

Why do you always have to be so rude and inflammatory? Please tone done your rhetoric.
 

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
Bravesfn1 said:
Why do you always have to be so rude and inflammatory? Please tone done your rhetoric.
I wouldn't call him rude and inflammatory, sarcastic, yes, but not rude or inflammatory. The man speaks the truth, is grounded in reality, and I agree with him about 95% of the time.

Horizons is in the past. I hardly remember it, but I know that Epcot is much better off with the current changes. If the old Epcot was working, they wouldn't have overhauled it.
 

Bravesfn1

New Member
STR8FAN2005 said:
I wouldn't call him rude and inflammatory, sarcastic, yes, but not rude or inflammatory. The man speaks the truth, is grounded in reality, and I agree with him about 95% of the time.

Horizons is in the past. I hardly remember it, but I know that Epcot is much better off with the current changes.

He speaks the truth in your opinion, not mine.
 

RealHawker

Member
STR8FAN2005 said:
I wouldn't call him rude and inflammatory, sarcastic, yes, but not rude or inflammatory. The man speaks the truth, is grounded in reality, and I agree with him about 95% of the time.

Horizons is in the past. I hardly remember it, but I know that Epcot is much better off with the current changes. If the old Epcot was working, they wouldn't have overhauled it.

How do you know that? (please take this in a non-attacking tone.)

Do you have figures that cite better attendence now versus the late 80's to mid 90's? (proportionate with population growth and overall attendence at WDW),. And if so, are the larger crowds coming away more satisfied, or are they just trying to get the most out of their mult-park passes?


Mission: Space(I don't like it, and not just because I get motion sickness, I know there is a calmer version available now) and Horizons are two different breeds of rides. I assume Disney managment thinks that thrill rides such as M:S are bigger draws vs the learning "dark ride" that was Horizons.

There are plenty of things in WDW and regular life that work perfectly fine, but are overhauled, and the end result is not neccessarily better. Horzions was dated, the structure was failing, and the funding from GE was gone....
If it was replaced with another futuristic dark ride, you wouldn't hear as much from guys like the OP and me.
 

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
RealHawker said:
How do you know that? (please take this in a non-attacking tone.)

Do you have figures that cite better attendence now versus the late 80's to mid 90's? (proportionate with population growth and overall attendence at WDW),. And if so, are the larger crowds coming away more satisfied, or are they just trying to get the most out of their mult-park passes?


Mission: Space(I don't like it, and not just because I get motion sickness, I know there is a calmer version available now) and Horizons are two different breeds of rides. I assume Disney managment thinks that thrill rides such as M:S are bigger draws vs the learning "dark ride" that was Horizons.

I don't have official proof, but I have eyes, and I have reports from fellow members. I may be wrong, but I don't believe that there was ever a 60+ minute wait for Horizons (M:S), WoM (TT), and FoodRocks (Soarin) at the same time. People are satisfied with Soarin' for sure, and Epcot is beginning to lose the "boring" label.

M:S is not just a thrill ride, it is the opportunity to experience something unique and rare, the effects and feeling of space flight. How is that not learning? I probably would have enjoyed Horizons, but the building was no longer safe, and M:S seemed like a better thing (to Disney) to replace it. I happen to agree.

An educational darkride is coming, Nemo's Undersea Adventure...
 

wannab@dis

Well-Known Member
RealHawker said:
If it was replaced with another futuristic dark ride, you wouldn't hear as much from guys like the OP and me.

Sure we would. The same thing would be said all the time and some would continue to pine for Horizons no matter what replaced it. I liked Horizons, thought it was a tad long at times, but I've always loved the slow omnimover style darkrides. The problem is that we have to look outside our personal likes and see that Disney has to have a broad appeal. If keeping the parks full of guests spending money requires them to replace an attraction, then so be it. I'd much rather them be extremely successful so the parks will be there for years to come.

My first trip was more than 25 years ago and I still have that same feeling of anticipation and magic when I visit the parks. Some attractions are gone, but other favorites have been added. Living in the past will only exacerbate this feeling of loss that people in this thread are posting about. There's no loss at WDW... that's a personal perspective brought on by holding onto nostalgia more than magic... "the golden age that never was..."
 

RealHawker

Member
wannab@dis said:
Sure we would. The same thing would be said all the time and some would continue to pine for Horizons no matter what replaced it. I liked Horizons, thought it was a tad long at times, but I've always loved the slow omnimover style darkrides. The problem is that we have to look outside our personal likes and see that Disney has to have a broad appeal. If keeping the parks full of guests spending money requires them to replace an attraction, then so be it. I'd much rather them be extremely successful so the parks will be there for years to come.

My first trip was more than 25 years ago and I still have that same feeling of anticipation and magic when I visit the parks. Some attractions are gone, but other favorites have been added. Living in the past will only exacerbate this feeling of loss that people in this thread are posting about. There's no loss at WDW... that's a personal perspective brought on by holding onto nostalgia more than magic... "the golden age that never was..."

As long as appeal to the broad spectrum doesn't turn epcot into Six Flags Orlando.... I'm ok with it.... I still get a great feeling from both parks.
 

freediverdude

Well-Known Member
I think maybe what the OP is talking about is the way the future world rides used to take you through the history of a certain subject, and then speculate on the future, kind of providing a sense of hope and inspiration for the future, while feeling good about what mankind has accomplished already. This is lacking in the newer rides. I don't think they necessarily should bring back Horizons, for example, or World of Motion, but maybe the replacements should have taken you on an updated tour of space travel or the history of vehicles, and then taken you on a thrilling adventure of the future of these subjects, leaving you with a sense of what is to come. Like what I would have expected from Disney as the replacement of World of Motion would have been a slow part of the ride going from Henry Ford's early days, up until now, and then maybe a more thrilling part of the attraction that takes you in a futuristic fuel cell vehicle and how it could perform, or even some kind of futuristic vehicle not even in the testing stages yet. What we got was a ride demonstrating some of the current tests vehicles go through, with a thrilling loop at the end. See what I mean about the difference? The current ride, although nice, and better than most theme parks' offerings, doesn't leave you with a sense of inspiration and wonder and the progress of humanity, just a sense of "that was fun, and semi-informative".
 

mikesoccer40

New Member
Agree / Disagree

Bear with my while I wax and wander.......

I will agree that bits of the magic do flake off from time to time depending on the experience of the moment that you are having in the parks and maybe the way that you perceive the activities that are going on around you. I think that some of the attention to detail has been lost by some of the disney workers and that sometimes they slip out of character and treat their position as the custodians of Walt's continuing legacy towards excellence in magic as a job.
That being said, it is fair to say that you can never go back. I remember going as a ten year-old in one of the first years that the park was open and thinking that nothing like Disney World could exist on the earth. We went over Christmas break and sprinted to ride the Jungle Cruise as our first disney experience. Everything was seen through fresh eyes with a childs wonder and even though I have been multiple times since then I can still see that same look in my children's eyes today.
So I do not think that anything has been lost, it has just changed in how it is presented and was'nt that Walt's dream that the parks would never stop growing and changing for us all.
 

Pongo

New Member
RealHawker said:
As long as appeal to the broad spectrum doesn't turn epcot into Six Flags Orlando.... I'm ok with it.... I still get a great feeling from both parks.

Clearly Epcot is not "Six Flags Orlando". You must be joking.

Two thrill rides that, on the thrill spectrum, are actually pretty tame does not turn Epcot into an amusement park.

It could REALLY be Six Flag Orlando if they added an in-plain-view, generic roller coaster with no theming. And multiplied that times five.

Seriosuly. Why all the lack of faith in WDI lately? Hello, they're trying. And they're succeeding. That's why Epcot is GROWING in populatiry from when it was full of dark rides. Really.

I have to agree with wannab on this one. People really need to lose the "me" factor and realize that rides are built for everyone, not the minority.
 

C&D

Well-Known Member
Maybe Walt said it best when he said it all started with an idea that "maybe the parents could have a little fun too." The parks are not supposed to be the where with all to solve every individuals every wim. Disney does one heck of a job, and in my opinion, no one else does it better to try to meet every patrons expectations, but let's be reasonable; look for the good (you'll find it) don't be/get too passionate that your idea didn't make the cut. (maybe it's still on the drawing board; how many times have you seen a new attraction or item and say to yourself, "you know I was just thinking about that".)
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom