Should Disney focus more on Classic attractions instead of $$$ filled Thrill rides?

[AMartin777]

Letter I wrote to Disney about all this.

OK. Risking getting flamed once again, I will repost here the letter written by myself and thoughtfully edited by a Rec.Art.Disney.Parks user. Please understand that this letter was meant to be a personal statement not just a complaint or "business" address. I must admit, I do feel that some things have improved at Disney since I wrote this letter but its core still applies. I thought it fit with the discussion topic. Thanks.

To Walt Disney World Management Group:

I am writing this letter to address concerns I have with the state of
operations for the Walt Disney World Resort in Orlando, Florida. I am
compelled by deep-seated thoughts and feelings about changes taking place at Disney Parks.

Though it seems cliché to say, my experiences at Walt Disney World have always revolved around one central concept. Magic. I can remember very vividly the awe I felt even at a young age taking my first monorail ride, seeing Cinderella's castle, and riding through the Haunted Mansion and Pirates of the Caribbean. My wife Barbara and I celebrated our
honeymoon at the Caribbean Beach Resort in 1996. This was her first
trip to Disney and she was as awe-struck with the experience as I ever
was. We returned again in 2001 for our 5-year anniversary less than a
month after the September 11th terrorist attacks. We could easily
have changed our plans but we felt there was no better way to
celebrate all that is America than share our love on Main Street, USA.

Things that I witnessed during recent visits to the parks as well
as information garnered from other Disney fans has given me pause
however. It seems that at some point in the early 1990s, disturbing
changes started to take place at Walt Disney World.

Disney has always been, until recently, a pillar of consistent thought
and execution. The idea that every single element in WDW should be
interconnected was apparent even from their initial conception.
Examples of this include:

· Resorts are themed not only to be independent experiences in
themselves, but also as visual references within the overall make up
of the Disney property. Especially in relation to other elements
(e.g. The Contemporary as a visual backdrop to Tommorrowland).
· Cast Member hiring and training procedures
· Cleanliness in parks, resorts, natural grounds and Cast Member
appearance
· High level of maintenance and upkeep for all areas of WDW


There are many issues that disturb me and reflect a lack of
consistency among elements at WDW. Aging parks demand a more
direct and aggressive maintenance and upkeep plan.
Cracked and chipped boards, faded and peeling paint, signposts and
display signs in disrepair are just a few of many examples of poor
maintenance that I and others have recently witnessed at WDW parks and
facilities. With the resources at your disposal, there is simply no
excuse for the appalling conditions I have witnessed at WDW as of late. Again it seems so cliché to say but would Walt have expected things this way? I don't believe he would and neither do the thousands of visitors to
WDW every day.


Recent years have shown a business direction that seems
to indicate a greater desire to "fight fire with fire" than to
maintain the course of original thought in aspects of development.
This is apparent with your addition of "thrill ride" attractions at
parks such as the "Rocking Roller-coaster" ride at Disney MGM Studios.
However, "Thrill Ride" theme parks such as Cedar Point in Sandusky,
Ohio fulfill that type of entertainment demand with better concepts
than Disney ever could. People visit WDW because no other
resort can offer the original and unique attractions that the Disney
name is known for. I beg you to take a moment and revisit the basic
innovative elements that built WDW. A concerted refocus on the basic
ideals upon which the Disney parks were founded will lead Walt Disney
World back to being a unique collection of experiences that cannot be
gained from any other "Theme Park" anywhere.

The last thing I would like to address with you is the ability of the
WDW parks to allow one to exist in another place. an imaginary place.
"Imagination, Imagination. A dream can be a dream come true, with
that little spark.in me and you!" Could it be said any better? I
don't think so and yet, ironically, the attraction is removed. I
believe that the removal of wonderful attractions such as the original
"Journey Into Imagination" show a disturbing trend among Disney
management. Why remove the "attraction" when it directly represents a
basic element that is so important to the Disney Theme Parks?
Everything that WDW stands for could all be culminated into one
distinct word.. Imagination.

I implore you to take the time to re-evaluate your company's approach
and direction to the Walt Disney World resort. I know that I speak
for many people when I say that I feel all of the things that I have
discussed are of vital importance to the foundation of Walt Disney
World. I have full faith in the Disney management's ability to
recapture the soul of what the Disney World Theme Parks are really
about. Remember. it all began with a mouse, an innovative,
imaginative, magical little mouse. I hope that it can be that way
again so that it never ends.

Thank you,

Alan J. Martin

 

[RedBaron]

I totally agree. I am also not a fan of most thrill rides (such as extreme roller coasters and big drops). I went on TOT once and dont think I will ever go on again unless my husband makes me go on (he likes thrill rides). It does seem like the only thing being built are thrill rides and fear that soon there will be nothing left for me to ride. I just wish they did not have to replace classic rides like Horizions but rather keep the classics and add on new attractions to keep everyone happy. I realize that there is only so much room in the parks but always feel bad when I hear that my favorite attractions are gone. I probably will go on Mission Space when I next visit WDW but it could never replace Horizions. It also makes me laugh that they replace an attraction such as Alien Encounter because it was too frightening for children and then build thrill rides that children could not ride anyway due to height requirements and the fact that the ride is also too scary? Disney has always been about family and it would be a shame if families could not enjoy the rides together. I love the classic dark rides and wish they would make more attractions like this, and it would also be nice if they made these rides a little bit longer like PotC. There seems to be too may attractions that are like 2 minuites long. By the way I am new to the forum and this is my first post. :wave:

 

[civileng68]

understand

Well please understand, I agree completely with you. However, I do love the thrill rides. I love MS and TOT and Test Track and things like that. i love them! However, I think the "magic" part of Disney comes from dark rides. There's something about the dark that causes a flow of ambiance and atmosphere. With the dark you can take people out of their world and place them anywhere you want, whether it be outer space (space mountain) or Neverland or in a town infested by Pirates.

I just wish that Disney would find some way within all they are doing to go back to their roots.

 

[waltdisny]

I feel Disney should refocus on the classic dark-rides. I like thrill rides and dark-rides, but I think a balance needs to be found. Right now the park has swung too far toward the thrill ride side of things.

I think this will actually hurt the park in the long-term. The reason why: little kids. People with young kids show up to WDW, and they see that there isn't a lot for their younger kids to do at many of the parks. So, they will be less likely to return next year.

If and when they do, their kids will be older, and less likely to bond with the parks in the way I (and many of you) have. Consider this:

Epcot used to have JII, but now that's not great. There's Mexico and the Land (for now) and Sea Base Alpha and that's really about it.

MGM has Ariel, The Muppetts, and Playhouse Disney, and that's about it.

Haven't any of the Rocket-scientists back at HQ noticed that the most consistently packed area in all of the parks is Fantasyland? That's because that is where the kids' rides are.

I live near a park called King's Island. Attendance is always good, even though the quality of the rides isn't even in the same universe as WDW. But KI has found a balance between great thrill rides and family-fun rides that works. From young to old there is something for everyone, and so people keep going back.

 

[General Grizz]

It shouldn't be classics versus thrill rides. . . it should be old rides versus new rides.

Obviously, attractions like CoP need desperate help -- now! I believe Disney should continue to add new attractions - granted they are in spirit, in show, and in full quality (without altering good ones).

Change for change's sake is damaging. Change for progress's sake is necessary. At the point that Pirates of the Caribbean is really in need of a rehab, it should be shut down and have brand new special effects, quality, etc. while not taking away from the original experience (hence, why the attraction is still a favorite).

But there should be a continual need for new attractions, and by this I mean something such as Tower of Terror. If new attractions for the sake of new attractions is the case (i.e. Dino-Rama), that's where the line is drawn. If a DIRECT CLONE is brought in, the original experience should not be molded! Rather, that clone should be made PART of the story. The exact opposite is happening at Epcot's Land, resulting only in less of an original (and authentic!) Epcot experience.

Another point: SEASONAL attractions need to be fixed properly. . . or stay open! Don't let pieces of art that have brought smiles to millions of faces rot. That's unDisneyesque.

Nutshell: continue new rides - if beneficial AND in spirit. Good examples: Pooh Bear, Expedition Everest, Mickey's Philharmagic, Ellen's Energy Adventure. Bad examples: Enchanted Tiki Room UNM, Goofy's Dancing Jamboree, Journey into Imagination with Figment, and Dino-Rama. In the meantime, fix attractions that are falling apart.

 

[Lee]

Oh man, is this ever a can of worms! Pardon me while I ramble.......

One word: Balance.

Both sides of the coin, "thrills" and "family", have to coexist. Having one without the other is a recipe for disaster.

First of all, it is a misconception that everything being built is a "thrill" ride.
Stitch is not. Stunt Show is not. Soarin' is not...exactly. Everest IS, but that is the only one under current construction.
And, look back a ways. Pooh is not a thrill ride. Neither is Buzz, Philharmagic, Aladdin, or Triceratops Spin. AK opened with only one ride with any level of thrill: Countdown to Extinction/Dinosaur, joined later by Kali.
In the same time frame, the only thrill rides that opened were Mission:SPACE, RnRC, Primevil Whirl and Test Track. Did I miss any?

That in no way looks like a takeover by thrill rides. What it DOES look like is Disney building a wide range of attractions...something for everyone. WDW is NOT turning into Six Flags or Cedar Point. What they are doing is providing attractions for those of us who had much rather ride ToT for hours than face a single ride on Small World. (shudder)

Now then...do I think we need more Pirates or Mansion quality dark rides?
Yep. I sure do.
Do we need giant B&M invert looming over Fantasyland?
Nope. (Just an example. Don't read anything into that. Though I DO love B&M inverts.)

The 20K spot? As far as I know it's just as likely to get a major "classic" style ride as a new "thrill" ride. Probably more likely, in fact.

And why aren't more dark rides coming down the pike? One reason. New dark rides don't put butts in the seats. Simple fact. If they built Peter Pan today, as it stands now, the public would be indifferent. Yeah, people would ride it, but very few would plan a vacation around it.

What am I getting at? I have no idea.....I'll shut up now.

Oh, one more thing. Don't attribute the decision to build certain rides to Eisner. In reality he is not that in touch with what is happening at the parks. It is WDI and park management who decide which rides they want...then go to Eisner for the money. For goodness sakes, when Eisner toured Disneyland this summer, he was unaware that the Jungle skippers didn't have guns anymore!

 

[General Grizz]

Oh man, is this ever a can of worms! Pardon me while I ramble.......

One word: Balance.

Both sides of the coin, "thrills" and "family", have to coexist. Having one without the other is a recipe for disaster.

First of all, it is a misconception that everything being built is a "thrill" ride.
Stitch is not. Stunt Show is not. Soarin' is not...exactly. Everest IS, but that is the only one under current construction.
And, look back a ways. Pooh is not a thrill ride. Neither is Buzz, Philharmagic, Aladdin, or Triceratops Spin. AK opened with only one ride with any level of thrill: Countdown to Extinction/Dinosaur, joined later by Kali.
In the same time frame, the only thrill rides that opened were Mission:SPACE, RnRC, Primevil Whirl and Test Track. Did I miss any?

That in no way looks like a takeover by thrill rides. What it DOES look like is Disney building a wide range of attractions...something for everyone. WDW is NOT turning into Six Flags or Cedar Point. What they are doing is providing attractions for those of us who had much rather ride ToT for hours than face a single ride on Small World. (shudder)

Now then...do I think we need more Pirates or Mansion quality dark rides?
Yep. I sure do.
Do we need giant B&M invert looming over Fantasyland?
Nope. (Just an example. Don't read anything into that. Though I DO love B&M inverts.)

The 20K spot? As far as I know it's just as likely to get a major "classic" style ride as a new "thrill" ride. Probably more likely, in fact.

And why aren't more dark rides coming down the pike? One reason. New dark rides don't put butts in the seats. Simple fact. If they built Peter Pan today, as it stands now, the public would be indifferent. Yeah, people would ride it, but very few would plan a vacation around it.

What am I getting at? I have no idea.....I'll shut up now.

Oh, one more thing. Don't attribute the decision to build certain rides to Eisner. In reality he is not that in touch with what is happening at the parks. It is WDI and park management who decide which rides they want...then go to Eisner for the money. For goodness sakes, when Eisner toured Disneyland this summer, he was unaware that the Jungle skippers didn't have guns anymore!

Random observation: It seems to me that it's also original thrill ride versus unoriginal character/cloned.

Wild. But I agree - we need balance, but more quality in that balance. . .

 

[jrriddle]

I think another thing to consider is (for the most part) Disney does thrill rides with alot of themeing and story. ToT, M:S, E:E (California Screaming being the omission from this list).
As others have said. It needs to be a mix of drark rides and thrill rides. As long as they maintain the story telling.