Our MK is poor next to Disneyland!!

[TP2000]

All the other parks and things to do in Florida really make it outweigh CA overall, but just MK vs. MK... Wow, there's just no comparison.

I couldn't agree more. The MK at Disney World is kind of crummy compared to Disneyland. But what has bothered me the most the last few visits to Disney World isn't that the MK rides were designed with inferior or shortened versions, it was more that the upkeep and overall maintenance was noticeably poor at Disney World's Magic Kingdom compared to the upkeep at Disneyland.

In Disney World's MK on major attractions..... Animatronics creaked and shook. Audio was garbled and out of whack. Lighting was bad. CM showmanship was lacking; at the Haunted Mansion they weren't even attempting to do the stretch room thing, they just had both sets of doors opened and the queue slowly snaked through the stretching room. At Disneyland that's never an option because they are real elevators that take you 40 feet underground, but that should never be an option at WDW to begin with.

Overall at the MK there were major E Ticket attractions that clearly hadn't been updated or plussed since Jimmy Carter was in office. Why not add the attacking pirahnas and exploding TNT barrels to the Jungle Cruise? Why not fix the audio on Pirates? Why not bring back the Canoes and the second riverboat? Why not add the four missing dark rides? Where's StorybookLand and Casey Jr. Circus Train? And how on earth do they excuse not updating the Haunted Mansion? If they don't want to spend the money on all the new digital effects and fancy extras, couldn't they at least grease the track so the buggies don't screech and scratch as they move along?

The one exception to this was MK's Splash Mountain, which is a better designed ride and show experience than Disneyland's. But pretty much every other attraction was inferior to Disneyland, from design to maintenance.

Plus there's the fact that Disneyland has over a dozen more rides than the MK does, from C Ticket dark rides to fancy E Ticket extravaganzas. Why don't they add some rides to Magic Kingdom?!?

For instance, Disneyland has SEVEN different dark rides, while Magic Kingdom only has three. What's up with that?!?

Magic Kingdom dark rides;
Peter Pan's Flight
Snow White's Scary Adventures
The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh

Disneyland dark rides;
Peter Pan's Flight
Snow Whites Scary Adventures
Pinnochio's Daring Journey
Mr. Toad's Wild Ride
Alice In Wonderland
Roger Rabbit's Car Toon Spin
The Many Adventures Of Winnie The Pooh

 

[Disneyfanman]

Well an obvious answer is that they don't need to add other stuff. The MK is the first or second most visited park in the country every year without adding anything. Disney won't increase their costs (additional labor and capital investment) unless they have to. Much of Disneyland was created from one man's vision, and Walt was famously fond of doing things that did not necessarily make financial sense, but would end up being better. Today's WDW parks are driven much more by the "open market"......meaning that if Disney thinks they need to attract more guests they will add more attractions. If they don't then they won't.

As for maintainence....my personal opinion is that WDW is very well maintained, but is suffering from the same problem that has haunted DL in recent years. Aging buildings and infrastructure requires more capital. They had to really invest needed funds into DL over the past 3 years to bring it back to life. WDW needs the same kind of thing.

 

[Julius & Boobah]

We visited Disney Land about ten years ago and I have to say it felt old and run down, very cramped and neglected. I know since then it has had a lot of rehabs and money put into it but that trip was very off putting the place felt very cramped too all the attractions were so close together. It's one saving grace IMO was Indiana Jones.

 

[C&D]

I just think the use of the word "poor" was a poor choice. It would have been much better to use "better than" instead. Poor and Disney, very rarely if ever should be used in the same sentence, at least in my opinion. It continues to amaze me how many Disney Fans/Lovers, trash the very foundation we find so dear. I'm not saying criticism is sometimes not warranted, but some of these attacks are just mean.

 

[William Marsden]

I agree with alot of your observations. I grew up in Southern California so DL has a special place in my heart. However.... when I go to WDW our family spends at least 10 days. I couldn't imagine doing that at Disneyland. DL's great but it doesn't have that much to offer.

California Adventure is a real dissapointment in my opinion. It just isn't a very cohesive park. I mean what does the Twilight Zone have to do with California. I think it fits in well at Disney/MGM but not at a California themed park unless you think of Nancy Pelosi, Gavin Newsome, Barbara Boxer, most of Hollywood, gee I guess California does mix well with the Twilight Zone! :lol:

 

[jaredliu]

It continues to amaze me how many Disney Fans/Lovers, trash the very foundation we find so dear. I'm not saying criticism is sometimes not warranted, but some of these attacks are just mean.

How Disney fans trash other amusement park like Universal/sixflags are the real mean one.

 

[bordesley]

That is interesting, the nearest I have been To the California MK is Soarin !

We will get there one day I'm sure but it seems a long way from England. It does sound a little like EuroDisney in Paris though, where Space Mountain, Pirates were improved dramatically when they were put in. Buzz too is a latest attraction I believe, so you expect is bang upto date. I have yet to see it.

What MK Florida does well IMO is keep the queues down to a reasonable size and with the power of 3 other parks, 2 Water parks and Downtown I'm sure most Brits, like me ignore the fairly near Paris resort for Florida.

I have been 7 times to Orlando and only once to Paris.

What are the crowds like in California's park ? Do they have any unique attractions ?

I'm sure we'll end up their one day, though it would be a wrench to leave Orlando.

 

[imagineer boy]

We visited Disney Land about ten years ago and I have to say it felt old and run down, very cramped and neglected. I know since then it has had a lot of rehabs and money put into it but that trip was very off putting the place felt very cramped too all the attractions were so close together. It's one saving grace IMO was Indiana Jones.

Ah, tthat was back when Paul Pressler, the most corrupt person ever to be in charge of DL was president of DL. I can assure you that things are MUCH better now than they were back then ever since Matt Ouimet took charge.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

I just think the use of the word "poor" was a poor choice. It would have been much better to use "better than" instead. Poor and Disney, very rarely if ever should be used in the same sentence, at least in my opinion. It continues to amaze me how many Disney Fans/Lovers, trash the very foundation we find so dear. I'm not saying criticism is sometimes not warranted, but some of these attacks are just mean.

Well, to be honest, I stand by my wording. If you'll notice, it says "our MK is poor COMPARED to DL". And that's the way I feel. I'm not saying it's a junky park... I'm not saying it's no good. I'm saying DL is better, head to head, and it makes the FLA MK pale in comparison. WDW is still "my" MK... Heck, we leave in 12 days to spend almost two weeks. I'll admit that after visiting DL a little over a week ago though, I'm not as excited to spend time in the MK as I usually am.

 

[MainSt1993]

I'm not sure if this has been asked yet or not, but here goes....

Which is more crowded/busier.....
MK Florida, or MK California?
Eg: Which has longer lines. Longer waits to get on a ride. Less elbow space just walking about. Etc....?

I've been going to DLR for <gasp> almost 30 years. When there is a new or reimagined attraction, the line can reach or pass an hour. But I've found 30-45 min to be the longest on average stand-by wait time (holidays like xmas and new years eve excepted). FastPass has greatly improved on those times. When you eclipse that with say, Magic Mountain, where any of the rides (and that's all they are are rides) can surpass 2 hours, and they only have half the in-park capacity, you really come to realize that Disney is doing something right. With the exception of dark rides, many Disney-designed attractions have capacities that well-exceed 2,000 guests per hour. A few even pass 3,000/hour. It cracks me up to look at local amusement park websites boasting their new ride can handle 1100-1200 per hour. Going to those parks is frustrating because their staff isn't running the ride AT capacity. Disney is very good about "dispatching on green", meaning that as soon as the attraction is ready to accept the next ride vehicle the cast is ready to release it. Have to give mad props to Disney for that!

 

[Mickey Maniac]

Having never been to Disneyland, I can't disagree too much. The only things I know that might make Magic Kingdom better are that it's not in the middle of Annaheim activity; it's in a separate world. Magic Kingdom is much larger than the Disneyland Park and isn't cluttered. I would have to say that our Cinderella Castle puts the Sleeping Beauty Castle to shame too!

 

[raven]

You abviously have not ridden other version's Buzz. Yes, you are sit on it casue the joystick is attached to the ride vehicle and become part of it.

Yes I have been on the other version of Buzz. And no, you don't sit on the joystick. That was a joke. But your lack of grammer makes it difficult to read your posts anyway.

I am sorry but that's absoulty BS or you have never been to IOA before you make that kind of statement. But more likely it is your Disney ego to say WDW makes "attractions" and IOA only makes "rides". The themeing of most part of IOA is as good as, if not better than WDW. Actually, a heavy themeing won't make up for the crapy version of the ride.

I have been to IOA and the theaming for their rides don't compare to WDW in my honest opinion. Look at Hulk: the theaming stops once the ride begins. That's only one example. I was merely making a point that most people don't go to WDW just for the rides. But if you think they are crappy, fine. Don't go. That just leaves more room for the rest of us. And I think every member on these forums has a "Disney ego" like you say. Otherwise we wouldn't be here.

 

[Stitch69]

Iam going this week to DL for the half marathon and will post my thoughts next week. I can't wait. I am sure I love it- but WDW has it's place in my heart- no matter what.:sohappy:

 

[TP2000]

Iam going this week to DL for the half marathon and will post my thoughts next week. I can't wait. I am sure I love it- but WDW has it's place in my heart- no matter what.:sohappy:

And it deserves to stay in that special place. Whichever Disney park you grew up with, that one will always be special, regardless of how poorly maintained the current management is keeping things. The MK at Disney World isn't a bad park, it's just when you compare it head to head with Disneyland it pales a bit.

Fewer rides, some noticeable shortcuts taken with what rides they do have, and an unfortunate lack of TLC and continuing investment in the attractions. Even the big, famous E Tickets at MK are creaky and still featuring effects circa 1975.

I would encourage everyone on this thread to go visit Tokyo Disneyland. Now there is a park that blows both MK and Disneyland out of the water when it comes to cleanliness, upkeep, TLC, maintenance and pride of ownership. On a scale of 1 to 10 I would rank Tokyo Disneyland a 9 (no one can ever be perfect), Disneyland a 7.5, and the Magic Kingdom a 6.

The same emotions Buried20KLeague is feeling about MK and Disneyland is exactly the same way I felt about Disneyland after my first trip to Tokyo Disney Resort. I was blown away by how much better the parks were in Tokyo. It made me take a more critical eye to Disneyland. And it really made the MK and the Florida operation drop down a couple of notches in my mind.

It also raised my expectations of what a Disney theme park should be like, and it raised it so high that I cancelled plans to visit WDW in November, 2006. Instead of Florida, I'm going back to Japan in January and spending 3 more days at Tokyo Disney Resort. I just can't bring myself to shell out hard earned money and put up with the lowered expectations and lowered standard anymore. There's a better Disney experience to be had in Tokyo, so that's where I'll take my Disney vacation dollars in a few months instead of Florida.

 

[tecowdw]

There were tons of dark rides at DL which I love! I can't get enough of them. I also loved Matterhorn. The big thing that bothered me about DL was the limited space. We felt crammed everywhere we went. Tomorrowland and Adventureland has some very, VERY narrow walkways that were always crowded. These were main walkways through the middle of the lands and not little paths. It was very difficult to stay with your group in these areas even on a less crowded day.

The WDW Magic Kingdom to me is still better. Maybe because I am so used to it. :wave:

Just got back from DL this weekend and only my second visit. I'm am a WDW die-hard so my perception is a bit skewed. I agree with you and thought the park was very cramped ~ that is my lasting overall impression looking back. They have packed alot of stuff into little space. I was shocked to step around the corner from Tomorrowland and be right on Main Street. WDW is so much more spread out that it makes a large difference.

California Adventure was, well, not much. It seemed like a Disney MGM Studios wannabe with a carnival thrown in. It wasn't all that engulfing of the magic for me.

Sadly, I found myself comparing everything against WDW. That made it hard to keep an open mind, I guess. Overall, while some attractions are better, I much prefer WDW. DL didn't give me that "I wanna go back" feeling. In fact, I probably won't bother again since it is a 4 hour flight for me. I admit that it was kind of nice for everything (both parks & DTD) to be within walking distance though of the hotel ~ Grand Californian.

 

[TTATraveler]

I think that anyone who goes to DL with and open mind and doesn't look to compare everything to WDW will have a great time and love DL for what it is. I think if you go in with the general opionion that DL isn't going to be as good and look to compare everything, then you are going to find faults.

I kept an open mind on my first trip to DL after 15+ trips to WDW and had a really great time. DLR is good for a short vacation with the real world just outside the Esplanade. WDW is good for a longer vacation and an escape from reality. Each "Magic Kingdom" has its own niche. The nostalgia, charm, and the fact that DL is Walt's park cannot be beat.

 

[Madison]

Walt Disney World's only saving grace is Epcot. If it did not have Epcot, I'd not hesitate a moment to write that Disneyland Resort is in every way superior. Epcot makes things interesting, though, if only because nearly 25 years after it opened, it remains the single Disney park without peer.

 

[TP2000]

Walt Disney World's only saving grace is Epcot. If it did not have Epcot, I'd not hesitate a moment to write that Disneyland Resort is in every way superior. Epcot makes things interesting, though, if only because nearly 25 years after it opened, it remains the single Disney park without peer.

What an excellent point! I hadn't really thought of it like that, but I strongly agree with you now that the concept has been introduced to this discussion.

As I mentioned in my previous post my recent visit to Tokyo Disney Resort convinced me to cancel plans to go to WDW again in late '06. But the one thing that still intrigues me enough to maybe go back to WDW at some future time, after my next trip to Tokyo in early '07, is that I would like to see Epcot again. That's the one thing that keeps WDW hanging on by a thread in the back of my mind, after giving up on their MK compared to Disneyland, and realizing that the customer service and showmanship standards have fallen too low in Florida to spend my money on.

MGM is similar enough to DCA that I would probably only spend a half-day there anyway, and Animal Kingdom was fun to do once but I don't really have a need to return. (I've never been that interested in animals to begin with, and an occasional trip to the San Diego Zoo satiates that minor issue.) And the lesser version of most attractions at MK have been well discussed in this thread.

But it's Epcot that still offers a little glimmer of hope that I might make it back to Florida at some time in the future, only after another fabulous visit to Tokyo Disney Resort and semi-regular visits to Disneyland just up the freeway. Epcot, and the vastly superior version of Splash Mountain at MK, are the glimmer of hope for WDW.

 

[PintoColvig]

As I mentioned in my previous post my recent visit to Tokyo Disney Resort convinced me to cancel plans to go to WDW again in late '06. But the one thing that still intrigues me enough to maybe go back to WDW at some future time, after my next trip to Tokyo in early '07, is that I would like to see Epcot again. That's the one thing that keeps WDW hanging on by a thread in the back of my mind, after giving up on their MK compared to Disneyland, and realizing that the customer service and showmanship standards have fallen too low in Florida to spend my money on.

MGM is similar enough to DCA that I would probably only spend a half-day there anyway, and Animal Kingdom was fun to do once but I don't really have a need to return. (I've never been that interested in animals to begin with, and an occasional trip to the San Diego Zoo satiates that minor issue.) And the lesser version of most attractions at MK have been well discussed in this thread.

But it's Epcot that still offers a little glimmer of hope that I might make it back to Florida at some time in the future, only after another fabulous visit to Tokyo Disney Resort and semi-regular visits to Disneyland just up the freeway. Epcot, and the vastly superior version of Splash Mountain at MK, are the glimmer of hope for WDW.

Well, let's take that old WDW horse out back behind the barn and shoot it. Let's put it out of its misery.



Here's the deal...
If MK were the only park or one of only two parks, far more attractions would have been placed in MK. As said before, the attractions in FL are spread out over four parks. DL may more attractions but the MK is still at least a full day park but it takes more time to really see it. As far as the cleanliness and show, it hasn't been that long ago that many people we're complaining that DL was becoming an armpit. If it weren't for the 50th, who knows what it would look like now. The show and cleanliness at MK, admittedly, was going down for a time but it's far better now than it has been for a few years. Let's cut MK some slack. It's not that bad.






Oh yeah, Eastsiiiiiiiiiiide!!!

^Props to my homey, 1disneydood

 

[Wonderlicious]

It pains me to say this, but as much as I'd want to, I have never been to Disneyland in California. And I've only been to the Magic Kingdom once in 1997 (I'm only 18, we live in England and my parents can't stand jet lag), though I plan to go to both sometime within the next two years. However, from my memories and online photos of the Magic Kingdom and comparing them to videos/photos of Disneyland California (I have a copy of the Disneyland Fun Sing Along Songs on video!), I think that Disneyland is the place that I want to visit first, and not just because I haven't yet visited. It looks more intimate as for many years, it was the only Disney park in California, where as by the time the Californian Adventure opened, there were two more theme parks and far more general resort stuff. Whilst Honey, I Shrunk the Audience (and Captain EO before that), Innoventions, Star Tours and Indiana Jones (okay, so there's a difference between the stunt show and the dark ride, but I'm talking about a general experience based on the character) were confined to Disneyland as it was really the only place where they could go in California without building a new park, having a number of theme parks at Disney World, the attractions could be filtered out to different places. Because Disneyland California seems more crammed together, it has that special cosy aura about it.

Also, just looking at the differences between Toon Town and Fantasyland in the two parks makes me side with the idea of going to Disneyland more. Plus, the Disneyland Fun video was my first real glance into a Disney theme park (I'd seen sections of rides like Small World and Pirates on other Sing Along tapes, as well as countless promos on videos for what was then called Euro Disney), so despite having never been there, I feel nostalgic about it.

However, for me, the ultimate version of the Magic Kingdom will probably always be Disneyland Paris. Whilst there is no Splash Mountain yet, I can honestly say that everything else rocks more than the Magic Kingdom in Florida ever will (I study French, so the very occasional language barrier is no big deal for me), and I think that having been the Magic Kingdom that I've visited the most, I'll feel much more partial about it than I would do to Disneyland. Like Disneyland California, it had the advantage of becoming cosier as there were no extra theme parks to put things, even though it would only be ten years before a new theme park was built. Plus, it's pretty original as aside from Main Street and to an extent Fantasyland, it was essentially a Disneyland redux, resulting in some gorgeous reimaginings (especially in Tomorrowland which was renamed Discoveryland). It was a shame that there were too many hotels, shops and restaurants built at Disneyland Paris when it first opened (the sheer amount was essentially the reason why what was originally called Euro Disney had money issues). Whilst I wouldn't have wanted the Walt Disney Studios theme park to open in 1995 like it would have done, there would have been more chance for a Little Mermaid dark ride and an Animatronic Beauty and the Beast show. Hopefully someone will let at least one of these ideas come out of the morgue, as both films are popular enough and need representing in Paris aside from the walk around characters.