Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I know who spends their time pledging obedience to companies that actually don’t like them for it…
We’ll do an awards show…best of luck to all the nominees
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Rumors. Musings. Casual.
- Thread starter pheneix
- Start date
We’ll do an awards show…best of luck to all the nominees
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
This is so true. Disney Parks were specifically designed to be a place where the entire family could have a good time. This means that the attractions would be appropriate for young children, but they would also be tasteful for parents. A kid could have a good time on a carousel, while the parents were able to soak in the ambiance of a European castle. It was that balance between visceral fun for children and the tasteful storytelling for adults that made Disneyland so successful. Timeless storytelling across age demographics.
Now Disney is aiming for only those with the lowest of expectations. Instead of a place where adults and children can have a good time, it's increasingly a place for kids. Parents and adults have to tolerate having every penny extracted while enduring garish and low-quality worlds. An example of this is the Ratatouille expansion. While most (including me) welcome the addition of a new attraction, the expansion was of a distinctly lower quality than the rest of the French Pavilion. Many of the facades cannot be explored and are cheaply painted on. What was originally a loving ode to French Architecture, was expanded with a cartoonish caricature.
Kids are also less likely to notice defects in props and show quality. The reason Disney show needed to be so exquisitely high was for the adults who visited. They're the ones who notice stuff like that. I grew up going to Walt Disney World, and one of the things I loved is that I could appreciate many of the details more as I grew up. I could see the intricacies of the stories and spaces that were created. Now, I commonly hear people say, "this isn't as good as I remember" or "maybe it was just the eyes of a child that missed the imperfections." They're attempting to explain why something they remember positively as a child is so bad now. It's not because it was never good. It's because Walt Disney World has lost its way.
The hotels are the ultimate example of this. While Walt Disney World has not yet seen the full-scale IP hotel invasion, I bet we'll have that in the next few years. Instead of loving spaces dedicated to different time periods and artistic styles, we'll get various iterations of the Pixar Pier Hotel. It's a fine hotel, but it's not aimed at adults.
Walt Disney World was never a "kids park." It was a family resort.
I felt that there should be something built … some kind of amusement enterprise built ... where the parents and the children could have fun together. So that’s how Disneyland started. Well, it took many years … it was a … oh, a period of maybe 15 years developing. I started with many ideas, threw them away, started all over again. And eventually, it evolved into what you see today at Disneyland. But it all started from a daddy with two daughters wondering where he could take them where he could have a little fun with them too.”
Walt Disney
Walt Celebrates Disneyland 1965
www.mouseplanet.com
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure I agree with this. Everything is very well done in this section. They should have themed the buildings for the sight lines from the skyway but everything else was done to a pretty good quality. I mean the little crepe stand at world showcase was not master design.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I do like the ratatouille area…but I don’t know if it’s because it’s well done…or I expect so little of late?
They either miss with detail (toy sorry land)…or miss on draw/appeal (Abrams land)
For every avatar…we get a meh like NFL or the frozen meet and greet house that no one wants (couldn’t see that one coming
)Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
When I was on my honeymoon in November, there was a certain point you couldn’t lower the AC past without maintenance coming and overriding it. Wanna say the lowest you could set it was 68 or 67 but I might be misremembering
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
The interior of the creperie is pretty bad.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
They have turned them down to a very limited range…and they all are intuitive to conserve power when you’re not there
Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
Hey when I’m not there, go for it. I’m not storing vats of ice cream on the counter so I could care less. But when I’m in the room? Let me set that sucker to a meat locker. Considering how much they charge for the rooms to begin with
Last edited:
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Probably because they’ve dethemed/cafeteriaized to an increasing degree for years and people kept paying for it…
like the glorified sizzler known as “be our guest”
Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
it’s especially bad in studios. There’s zero relief to the crazy big waits to the rides because the park is the size of a postage stamp and only has E tickets for the most part. You need some basic Omnimover rides there to take those people out of lines and pathways and occupied elsewhere
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
Cool thing is they also own Reedy Creek Energy Services which supplies the electricity they use to run the AC, seems like they might want to sell more power as the Toy Story guy would say........
networkpro
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
Walt Disney World was never a "kids park." It was a family resort.
I felt that there should be something built … some kind of amusement enterprise built ... where the parents and the children could have fun together. So that’s how Disneyland started. Well, it took many years … it was a … oh, a period of maybe 15 years developing. I started with many ideas, threw them away, started all over again. And eventually, it evolved into what you see today at Disneyland. But it all started from a daddy with two daughters wondering where he could take them where he could have a little fun with them too.”
Walt Disney
Walt Celebrates Disneyland 1965
Walt or his family hasn't had control of the company for decades. These are the folks that are really calling the shots and sweater man dances to their tune.
| Shareholder | Number of Shares |
|---|---|
| State Street Corporation | 50 million |
| Vanguard Group | 45 million |
| BlackRock | 40 million |
| Berkshire Hathaway | 35 million |
| Capital Research | 30 million |
Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
One of the most ludicrous claims of that backlash (which did have legitimate criticisms to it mind you) was that the park was somehow on “sacred ground” because it wasn’t super far from manassas
Nothing says “honor the fallen” like urban sprawl instead…
I think that there was a realization with the negative reaction to the Incredibilization of the Contemporary Resort, that there is a limit to the forceful insertion of IP. In more recent renovations at the GF, Boardwalk, Yacht, Saratoga, OKW, you’ve seen the IP intrusion much more subdued and more tactfully done.
I think it was lesson learned that you don’t make a $800+/night room have all the feel and quality of a room at AOA. (Not that Disney Deluxe Hotels even deserve to be categorized at that level of “luxury”.)
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Or a struggle over forced lifelong servitude
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I was pleasantly surprised with how nice the Riverside renovation went. A few princess and the frog elements on the curtains but they left the herb Ryman painting and the over all feel of the room is still on theme and doesn’t feel cartoon or value resort level.
Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
Yeah some of the stuff the proposed was bonkers and very out of touch. Saying “we want you to know what it was like to be a slave” is….something to say. I’m sure they meant the way that historical sites around the country educate you on that sort of thing, but you gotta choose your words carefully.
And I think the idea of the park would’ve become more of an inflection point in a time where politics has gotten even more polarizing. But the locals can be happy now that they have their suburbia and golf courses on that sacred ground instead of a theme park
Lots of commentary on here about Simpsons….
Rumormongering from Disney side: there’s a huge push from the CEO’s office over Simpsons. The show’s reruns are a draw on D+. Apparently a big one. I think the CEO straight up enjoys the show too.
I think in a perfect world for Disney, they’re gonna want these characters on stage repping their parks at D23.
Rumormongering from Disney side: there’s a huge push from the CEO’s office over Simpsons. The show’s reruns are a draw on D+. Apparently a big one. I think the CEO straight up enjoys the show too.
I think in a perfect world for Disney, they’re gonna want these characters on stage repping their parks at D23.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
You can NEVER have enough McMansions for defense contractors
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Honestly, this is not too surprising. One of the primary reasons Disney justified the Fox acquisition was the ability to use Fox to drive synergy. There's only one problem with that. Apart from National Geographic on Disney+, Disney's not really done anything to leverage the Fox assets. Not even the X-Men or Fantastic 4 have yet appeared in the MCU. The handful of films and brands that are Fox in origin on Disney+ are not driving significant viewership (with the exception of Avatar). Unlike Iger's acquisitions of Star Wars and Marvel, investors are scratching their heads wondering why he spent so much on these assets. There's been almost no tangible benefit.
Pushing Simpsons is a face-saving maneuver. Iger needs to push the Simpsons so he has proof of the Fox buyout's value.