News Paradise Pier Becoming Pixar Pier

Sharon&Susan

Well-Known Member
Real talk: Toy Story Midway Mania is what broke the original theme. Shifting to Pixar Pier is just a dramatic over-correction for that problem.
I like TSMM, but I agree with this. Just as I like the original Star Tours, but I hate what it did to the rest of Tomorrowland.
 

D.Silentu

Well-Known Member
Real talk: Toy Story Midway Mania is what broke the original theme. Shifting to Pixar Pier is just a dramatic over-correction for that problem.
Interesting thought, though I wonder if there was really much of a theme to break before Midway Mania came along.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
We get that. Pixar Pier is crap. We re comparing one structure to another or one sign to another and saying which one we think looks better. I think anyone that has eyes should be able to say what they think looks better. I guess it’s the word “upgrade” that you take issue with. The land is obviously a downgrade as a whole from a thematic standpoint. But If I walk by the Lamplight Lounge and that sign makes me happier than the previous signage and is more aesthetically pleasing to me then that particular sign is an upgrade for me right?

When you re walking by the sign you’re not going to like it any less because it’s disconnected from aesthetics of Pixar as a brand. Let’s not act as if aesthetics are not a huge part of the theme park experience and probably more important than theme. Obviously when everything is in perfect harmony is best.
It may not be better themed or even themed at all. But, it's better decorated.
“Form ever follows function.”
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Pixar Pier sucks but so did Paradise Pier. The stuff I liked about Paradise Pier still exists mostly ( the ambiance at dusk/ night and kinetic energy). It’s not that we lost much. It’s that it should have been improved. It should have been better than painted iconography on flat walls and jack jacks on sticks. Of course the starting point and idea of a Pixar Pier isn’t a great starting point for an idea for a land anyway.
 

__r.jr

Well-Known Member
We get that. Pixar Pier is crap. We re comparing one structure to another or one sign to another and saying which one we think looks better...

Here is where one could take issue on such a comparison... It's utterly disingenuous.

It could be argued that Pixar Pier did elevate specific architectural elements throughout the Pier section i.e. Lamplight Lounge, Pixar Promenade, Bing Bong's Sweet Stuff etc. However, the design choices made for the remodeling of the Pier were shallow, contrived and pretentious. Walt Disney Imagineering has openly admitted on wanting Pixar Pier to emulate Tokyo DisneySea quality conveyance. Not in conjunction of comprehensive storyline, established placemaking and layered urban design that of which American Waterfront and Cape Cod does, but in terms of architectural finishes and embellishments Toyville Trolly Park has.

Then a counter argument could be, well Toyville Trolly Park is meant to portray a classic seaside amusement park; Disney wants to convey that stylistic finish onto Pixar Pier. That's fine until one understands that Toyville Trolly Park is meant to be modeled ostensibly after Luna Park on Coney Island, as it should, because that would make it a coherent subsection of the New York based American Waterfront. All of which have nothing to do with a California based seaside pier in a California themed park.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Here is where one could take issue on such a comparison... It's utterly disingenuous.

It could be argued that Pixar Pier did elevate specific architectural elements throughout the Pier section i.e. Lamplight Lounge, Pixar Promenade, Bing Bong's Sweet Stuff etc. However, the design choices made for the remodeling of the Pier were shallow, contrived and pretentious. Walt Disney Imagineering has openly admitted on wanting Pixar Pier to emulate Tokyo DisneySea quality conveyance. Not in conjunction of comprehensive storyline, established placemaking and layered urban design that of which American Waterfront and Cape Cod does, but in terms of architectural finishes and embellishments Toyville Trolly Park has.

Then a counter argument could be, well Toyville Trolly Park is meant to portray a classic seaside amusement park; Disney wants to convey that stylistic finish onto Pixar Pier. That's fine until one understands that Toyville Trolly Park is meant to be modeled ostensibly after Luna Park on Coney Island, as it should, because that would make it a coherent subsection of the New York based American Waterfront. All of which have nothing to do with a California based seaside pier in a California themed park.


Right. This is what I tried to sum up with "Pixar Pier is crap." Not sure what it has to do with the rest of what i said though.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Real talk: Toy Story Midway Mania is what broke the original theme. Shifting to Pixar Pier is just a dramatic over-correction for that problem.

Thats an interesting take on it. I'm of the opinion that TSMM was a minor inconsistency that could be overlooked and was... by me at least. It fit the spirit of a boardwalk even though the IP didn't make sense there. Id be much more happy with a Paradise Pier 3.0 with better architecture that included TSMM and all of the Disney characters than Pixar Pier in its current state or probably any state for that matter.

Back to TSMM, a dark ride in a showbuilding with nice architecture that fit the theme of the land is much different than what we have with Pixar Pier. Sure, a huge Mr. Potato Head AA is outside but at least its quality. Sometimes (actually a lot of times at Disney parks) things get a pass because they are quality or fit the spirit of the land or attraction. Incredicoaster for example does none of these things. With Screamin we had the old timey pre launch NPH voice and wonderful music. Now we have annoying Elastigirls voice and super annoying Dash's voice counting down pre launch over and over again all day. I feel bad for the people eating outside at Lamplight.
 
Last edited:

__r.jr

Well-Known Member
Right. This is what I tried to sum up with "Pixar Pier is crap." Not sure what it has to do with the rest of what i said though.

Pardon, for I should have expanded further.

Pixar Pier's new aesthetics, while visually grabbing at first sight, does nothing to sustain one's attention once passed the surface. It fails because instead of solidifying on a concrete concept accompanied with committed execution, it relies on pastel paint schemes, disconnecting architectural styles, oversized statues and props and a plethora of intellectual property from a computer animation studio in the hopes of connecting it altogether. The new changes only further exacerbate an identity crisis that has plagued the area since its inception 17 years ago and no amount of DisneySea inspired copulas can mask it.

You're right. The Pier section of this park has always been problematic but what good do these newly applied stylistic enhancements do other than be slight cosmetic improvements when its underlying issues still and have always been foundational?
It's all merely superficial and nothing fundamental.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Pardon, for I should have expanded further.

Pixar Pier's new aesthetics, while visually grabbing at first sight, does nothing to sustain one's attention once passed the surface. It fails because instead of solidifying on a concrete concept accompanied with committed execution, it relies on pastel paint schemes, disconnecting architectural styles, oversized statues and props and a plethora of intellectual property from a computer animation studio in the hopes of connecting it altogether. The new changes only further exacerbate an identity crisis that has plagued the area since its inception 17 years ago and no amount of DisneySea inspired copulas can mask it.

You're right. The Pier section of this park has always been problematic but what good do these newly applied stylistic enhancements do other than be slight cosmetic improvements when its underlying issues still and have always been foundational?
It's all merely superficial and nothing fundamental.

I don’t disagree with any of this. I think if you read all of my posts in the last couple pages you’ll get a better idea of my complete opinion of Pixar Pier. I was just getting granular on the topic of aesthetics in that particular post. It happens here when we get bored and their hasn’t been any juicy news in a while.
 

Ismael Flores

Well-Known Member
Improvements & Only Good Things from Pixar Pier (according to @Disneylover152)

They really need to rethink this whole Bandstand area. I really like what they did it looks so much better than before but if you are going to design something than put it to use. Whomever is in charge of scheduling for some of the entertainment really needs to sit down and rethink things they do. It is quite annoying to see them use the bandstand for a few hours out of the day and then just have it sit empty for most of the afternoon and evening. DCA is lacking anykind of water show at the moment so why not extend the bandstand showings into the evening and keep the area lively.

If they are not going to use the area properly then they need to figure out a way of re-configuring part of the backstage area and use the center portion of this new facade as an entrance for an attraction. Even if there is no way of adding much behind this area they could have at least turned it into a small indoor theater and create a playhouse Disney style show based on Pixar characters. of course the obvious choice would have been to move turtle talk here.
 

Ismael Flores

Well-Known Member
I'm just curious but people keep saying that DCA's pier doesn't fit the theme and i am curious to understand what a theme of a amusement pier park is suppose to be? or what do people thing it is?

Aside from these amusement being near the ocean they never really had a theme. Buildings never match, the architecture was always inconsistent and from different time periods and locations.
Shows were mostly based on circus freaks and oddities
the collection of rides ranged in theme You had rides based on Mermaid others based on the West others had Egyption, the underworld, Hawaiian, haunted dolls and circus freaks etc

somehow some people think that everything needs to be victorian themed for some odd reason. Yes Disney has taken it a few steps forward and added newer characters within the theme and maybe that was the mistake. They should have tried and incorporated them into a different timeline. I think they did a good job with Mr potato head by dressing his AA with the proper clothing and maybe they could have done the same with some of these other characters.

Instead it looks like they see the Pier as a place that has evolved thru the years and is not stuck within a certain time period



seems like anything would fit within a seaside Pier and still be within theme. All we really need is the fish smell and the overflowing trash bins.
Ocean_Front_Walk_1927.jpg
opp-egypt.jpg
pacificoceanpark_westinghouse.jpg
4.jpg
 
Last edited:

DanielBB8

Well-Known Member
They want the super premium Pier, not the cut rate version that most regular people experience. Disney is actually in a conundrum of squeezing in between two contradictory goals. One is the mass market and the second is the luxury market, but Disney was always in the first and dabbles in the second market.

They should remove Incredibles coaster and put in a premium hotel, which becomes the backdrop to the World of Color show, BUT Disney hasn’t built any hotel in any price point at Disneyland Resort for nearly 2 decades. This tells you more about how Disney feels about the premium market in Southern California. Doesn’t pencil out.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom