News Paradise Pier Becoming Pixar Pier

[No Name]

I knew that Disney wasn't paying for Tokyo to be built. I just didn't realize how much better the designs actually are when you fork over the cash.

And my point is, Disney can most definitely afford it and should be doing that in all of their parks. Not purposely choosing cheap, bad design when they are footing the bill. How lame is that?

Okay agreed.
And know that comment wasn't referring to you.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I knew that Disney wasn't paying for Tokyo to be built. I just didn't realize how much better the designs actually are when you fork over the cash.

And my point is, Disney can most definitely afford it and should be doing that in all of their parks. Not purposely choosing cheap, bad design when they are footing the bill. How lame is that?

I'm sure it's all very complicated with taxation and operating costs being very different, but I'd be very curious to know the difference between ROI at DLR vs the TDLR. I suspect that DLR is pulling in more for its owners than TDLR is.

 

[Curious Constance]

I always thought it would be bad if Disney sold the theme parks to another entity. Now it sounds like it would be ideal.

 

[Curious Constance]

I'm sure it's all very complicated with taxation and operating costs being very different, but I'd be very curious to know the difference between ROI at DLR vs the TDLR. I suspect that DLR is pulling in more for its owners than TDLR is.

I have no idea how it all works, and this may mean nothing when all factors are considered, but I believe it costs less to go to Tokyo parks than it does here.

 

[smile]

I knew that Disney wasn't paying for Tokyo to be built. I just didn't realize how much better the designs actually are when you fork over the cash.

And my point is, Disney can most definitely afford it and should be doing that in all of their parks. Not purposely choosing cheap, bad design when they are footing the bill. How lame is that?

the differences in those two parks and their side-by-side timelines is a case in point what difference a budget can make...
literally built 'on the cheap' ... eh, it's the dl sister park, people will flock regardless - who cares, we can get away with it.

one of the things that sticks in my craw (and is one of many sticking points i have when recalling mr. e), is that if you truly must go that route, maybe you do it on a little park in missouri or maybe half way around the world...
not across the esplanade from the park that started it all for walt's sake!

so cal/dl guests aren't that foolish/easily amused and it bombed -
mr i even stated dca at opening was a 'brand withdrawl' which is one of the reasons he throws a few bucks it's way relatively often

 

[Curious Constance]

the differences in those two parks and their side-by-side timelines is a case in point what difference a budget can make...
literally built 'on the cheap' ... eh, it's the dl sister park, people will flock regardless - who cares, we can get away with it.

thing that sticks in my craw (and is one of many sticking points i have when recalling mr. e), is that if you truly must go that route, maybe you do it on a little park in missouri or maybe half way around the world...
not across the esplanade from the park that started it all for walt's sake!

so cal/dl guests aren't that foolish and it bombed -
mr i even stated dca at opening was a 'brand withdrawl' which is one of the reasons he throw's a few bucks it's way relatively often

There are parts of DCA that I enjoy, there is no denying that, but comparing it to Disneyland is a joke. Everyone prefers Disneyland. EVERYONE. (Except maybe Hans).

My kids enjoy things of all caliber. From Disneyland, to our local amusement park, to Chuck E Cheese. But not even they are fooled by DCA. They like parts of it too, but overall they know it's no comparison to DL.

It's embarrassing when you proclaim yourself to be the utmost in high quality experience to build a park with little in the way of quality right next to one of the best parks in the world.

And they still don't get it. They're still designing junk and slashing budgets for the flimsy designs.

Mama Mia!

 

[smile]

There are parts of DCA that I enjoy, there is no denying that, but comparing it to Disneyland is a joke. Everyone prefers Disneyland. EVERYONE. (Except maybe Hans).

My kids enjoy things of all caliber. From Disneyland, to our local amusement park, to Chuck E Cheese. But not even they are fooled by DCA. They like parts of it too, but overall they know it's no comparison to DL.

It's embarrassing when you proclaim yourself to be the utmost in high quality experience to build a park with little in the way of quality right next to one of the best parks in the world.

And they still don't get it. They're still designing junk and slashing budgets for the flimsy designs.

Mama Mia!

on the bright side - i've yet to go to aulani, but it looks beautiful...
then again, so does almost the entirety of hawaii itself.

 

[TROR]

Only people who truly prefer DCA, or at least believe it's equal to Disneyland, are usually the Twitter and Instagram s̶h̶i̶l̶l̶s̶ APs.

 

[Curious Constance]

on the bright side - i've yet to go to aulani, but it looks beautiful...
then again, so does almost the entirety of hawaii itself.

Yes, they didn't appear to skimp on Hawaii!

 

[Old Mouseketeer]

the differences in those two parks and their side-by-side timelines is a case in point what difference a budget can make...
literally built 'on the cheap' ... eh, it's the dl sister park, people will flock regardless - who cares, we can get away with it.

one of the things that sticks in my craw (and is one of many sticking points i have when recalling mr. e), is that if you truly must go that route, maybe you do it on a little park in missouri or maybe half way around the world...
not across the esplanade from the park that started it all for walt's sake!

so cal/dl guests aren't that foolish/easily amused and it bombed -
mr i even stated dca at opening was a 'brand withdrawl' which is one of the reasons he throws a few bucks it's way relatively often

Speaking of brand withdrawal, one of Paul Pressler's choice quotes when DCA was labelled "Six Flags over Anaheim", was the he didn't mind being compared to Six Flags. This is marketing malpractice. Visa became a case study in marketing classes when they shifted their ads from competing with MasterCard (traditionally seen as the less-upper-middle-class card) to AmEx. It didn't matter that AmEx was a T&E (Travel and Expense) card paid off monthly and not a revolving charge. It was marketed as an upper-class card, so the whole "they don't take American Express" campaign is an advertising legend which paid off for Visa.

Pressler's approach to DCA was the exact opposite.

 

[Ismael Flores]

If they were building this themed to Toy Story you wouldn't hear a peep from me:

View attachment 261355

But instead of building that, they are painting the roof of the existing structure and adding a water feature, and this:

View attachment 261356

While the second picture may end up looking a little better than what's there currently, it's still a net loss because it's at the expense of what could have been (something amazing like picture one). Since they're adding a giant Jessie and new paint on the roof, we can pretty much be assured that we'll never see anything truly amazing for many, many years to come.

True but we could have said the same thing about bugsland. When it was built many of us hated The idea in a park about California but now we hear it might get torn out. Nothing is permanent and a new group of management can very well decide to change it again. There has been so many proposed ideas for the pier and it is constantly changing with change of management.

I’m just saying that a more cohesive area is better than what is there now even if it’s not the best idea

 

[TROR]

True but we could have said the same thing about bugsland. When it was built many of us hated The idea in a park about California but now we hear it might get torn out. Nothing is permanent and a new group of management can very well decide to change it again. There has been so many proposed ideas for the pier and it is constantly changing with change of management.

I’m just saying that a more cohesive area is better than what is there now even if it’s not the best idea

If only this was more cohesive, then.

 

[Ismael Flores]

If only this was more cohesive, then.

Well in a way it is if we see it for what it is, a seaside amusement on a pier with random carnival rides made to entertain. Isn’t that what all seaside amusement parks are?
I have been to many and never have I seen one that has one specific theme or architecture wether it be themed to a generic strong man and collection of weird characters or a collection of known characters.

I do think it could have been designed differently. I would have preferred an I redobles ride that took place inside an abandoned haunted maze. Play the whole scooby doo angle. An evil band guy makes his lair in an old abandoned carnival ride and is discovered by the incredibles. The whole show building could have been themed without fashioned carny scary corny moments. Perfect way to add either a thrill element to it or make ITV a family ride using the mystic manor approach.
All the other carny rides couldn’t have used that aproach maintaining the look started by midway mania but with the Pixar character integrated in and still maintain the Paradise Pier name without districts

 

[Curious Constance]

True but we could have said the same thing about bugsland. When it was built many of us hated The idea in a park about California but now we hear it might get torn out. Nothing is permanent and a new group of management can very well decide to change it again. There has been so many proposed ideas for the pier and it is constantly changing with change of management.

I’m just saying that a more cohesive area is better than what is there now even if it’s not the best idea

I don't see it as necessarily more cohesive. Why is there a mid century family home on a seaside pier? Because it just happens to be the home of the family that is staring in a new movie opening around the same time as the new land. And to me it seems they are forgoing any cohesiveness just to promote a movie.

There is a new Pixar movie opening this summer and it's a Disney park. I expect lots of advertising of the new movie at the park. Merchandise should line the shelves, characters should roam the park, parades and shows could be updated to include characters from the movie.

But changing the theme of an entire land on already popular attractions? That's cheap and tacky to me and shows they care little for the integrity of the park itself.

 

[Disneylover152]

Mama Mia!

 

[alias8703]

While we're on the topic of King Triton's Carousel here's a neat tidbit I had no knowledge of. Kinda bums me out now that it's going away. It's like a second death for these now-gone boardwalks.

View attachment 261382

How can it bum you out or feel like a second death if you had zero knowledge about it until just now?

 

[Ismael Flores]

I don't see it as necessarily more cohesive. Why is there a mid century family home on a seaside pier? Because it just happens to be the home of the family that is staring in a new movie opening around the same time as the new land. And to me it seems they are forgoing any cohesiveness just to promote a movie.

There is a new Pixar movie opening this summer and it's a Disney park. I expect lots of advertising of the new movie at the park. Merchandise should line the shelves, characters should roam the park, parades and shows could be updated to include characters from the movie.

But changing the theme of an entire land on already popular attractions? That's cheap and tacky to me and shows they care little for the integrity of the park itself.

I recommend seeing “things that are not here anymore” it was a show release by KCET in the early 2000 narrated by Ralph Story.
It has segment of the old Pacific Ocean Park and then tell me how a mid century house on a seaside Pier doesn’t match the theming. Pacific ocean park had a mountain, volcanoe, jungle structures of different eras and just about anything that they could cram into the pier with just about any theme imaginable.
I bet you too that the change to Incredibles will even increase the wait times to the coaster which even during the busy season had wait times less than an hour while midway mania had much longer times. I understand the hate you n the change but understand that the logic for the especially when the main arguement is to say that it is a marketing push or that it does thematically fit.
Thematically there are better choices but because it is a pier amusement anything fits and these parks have always been a marketing thing from the time the park opened with a castle named after a been movie they were working on and a land filled with sponsorship attractions

 

[Curious Constance]

I recommend seeing “things that are not here anymore” it was a show release by KCET in the early 2000 narrated by Ralph Story.
It hasn’t segement of the old Pacific Ocean Park and then tell me how a mid century house on a seaside Pier doesn’t match the theming. Pacific ocean park had a mountain, volcanoe, jungle structures of different eras and just about anything that they could cram into the pier with just about any theme imaginable.
I bet you too that the change to Incredibles will even increase the wait times to the coaster which even during the busy season had wait times less than an hour while midway mania had much longer times

I have no doubt that the change will increase wait times initially. Thanks to APs they can debut a new color of Mickey ears and have hour long waits. But those people already have their APs, the real test will be if it inspires new people to buy APs or people to travel to the resort for vacation who otherwise wouldn't have. I doubt it'll have much of an impact in that regard.

And it seems like a stretch to say that the Incredibles house fits because there was one actual seaside Pier that crammed anything they could onto it. Just because odd or different real life examples exist doesn't mean it's a good idea to do that when you're making a fake area and expecting it to evoke a certain time and place to those that visit it.

 

[disnyfan89]

I have no doubt that the change will increase wait times initially. Thanks to APs they can debut a new color of Mickey ears and have hour long waits. But those people already have their APs, the real test will be if it inspires new people to buy APs or people to travel to the resort for vacation who otherwise wouldn't have. I doubt it'll have much of an impact in that regard.

Let's hope not! Disneyland resort has enough of those already...

 

[Ismael Flores]

I have no doubt that the change will increase wait times initially. Thanks to APs they can debut a new color of Mickey ears and have hour long waits. But those people already have their APs, the real test will be if it inspires new people to buy APs or people to travel to the resort for vacation who otherwise wouldn't have. I doubt it'll have much of an impact in that regard.

And it seems like a stretch to say that the Incredibles house fits because there was one actual seaside Pier that crammed anything they could onto it. Just because odd or different real life examples exist doesn't mean it's a good idea to do that when you're making a fake area and expecting it to evoke a certain time and place to those that visit it.

My point is that it does fit because seaside piers were not a collective architecture to begin with, as a matter of fact they never even had much of any Victorian architecture in real life in the west coast.
With that said I agree that it wasn’t the best decision because an all Pixar cartoonish theme doesn’t evoke the same feeling of a place in time that most think of when talking about a seaside pier.
Like I mentioned before, they could have still used all Pixar characters and have integrated them into a more nostalgic setting of a fantazised Victorina pier. The incredibles dark ride idea being a perfect example. They even have a proposal from years back for such a thrill ride that they scrapped because of possible lower than expected ride capacity.