Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts Tres

Status
Not open for further replies.
BryceM

BryceM

Well-Known Member
luv said:
Putting a coaster indoors immediately removes a lot of the thrill. It's just more fun outside. :)
Click to expand...
I like both. I'm a big sucker for roller coasters in the dark with good theming. But I also love a good, thrilling coaster... Like Sheikra or Montu.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
PirateFrank said:
Strange to see all this BoG hate. I was there in January and it was the single greatest meal of our entire trip....I was so enthralled by it that it was the first ADR I made for November. I'm not doubting everyone's opinions and reviews....it's just that my experience doesn't reconcile with them. I hope, when I go in November, I'm not let down.
Click to expand...
Why did you spend the rest of the trip eating at Electric Umbrella?
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
HMF said:
This is what happens when TDO decides to build a glorified restaurant in what should have been the locale for a dark ride. All I can say is I saw this coming a mile away.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with Be Our Guest, it's overhyped but that's not really a problem. I think the biggest problem with the Fantasyland expansion is that they missed the opportunity to put in a Tangled ride. That should have been the Snow White replacement.
 
DougK

DougK

Well-Known Member
tissandtully said:
Not to mention that signature restaurants on the DDP are even a worse deal.
Click to expand...


My first choice would be to eliminate the Disney Dining Plan completely but since we know that's not going to happen I think that Signature Dining, if it HAS to be part of the Disney Dining Plan at all, should be 1.5 credits instead of two. That would be more in line with the value of the credits compared to non-Signature places.

But again I would rather see a return to the pre-dining plan era. Or maybe just eliminate the Signature restaurants from the dining plans completely.

Or for yet another idea which still fits into Disney's "packages and plans" way of selling things, have a Signature Dining Plan. I know they kind of have this now with the Premium and Platinum Plans but those also include lots of other stuff like tours, golf, etc. I am talking about only dining, mugs and snacks like the other dining plans. Buying this plan would be the only way to dine at Signature restaurants using a dining plan. Just a thought.
 
DougK

DougK

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
You mean the park map that now has both attractions and restaurants numbered? Honestly, I think this is a really easy mistake to make right now. There's always a line out the door, it's a highly themed building next to another highly themed building. To the uninitiated, I can definitely see this being confused for a ride. Just like the Tangled bathrooms.
Click to expand...


Maybe I am crazy here but if Disney were to build a ride based on Beauty and the Beast would they call it Be Our Guest? Don't the words "Be Our Guest" kind of imply you are coming in to have some food? And of course the word "Restaurant" on the sign should help too.

What do they think it is, a candleabra coaster?

"Ride the Be Our Guest" doesn't even sound appealing!
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
DougK said:
Maybe I am crazy here but if Disney were to build a ride based on Beauty and the Beast would they call it Be Our Guest? Don't the words "Be Our Guest" kind of imply you are coming in to have some food? And of course the word "Restaurant" on the sign should help too.

What do they think it is, a candleabra coaster?

"Ride the Be Our Guest" doesn't even sound appealing!
Click to expand...
Is that any less crazy than calling a ride "Under the Sea"? How many people go on rides without knowing the actual name of it. It's "The Little Mermaid Ride" or the "Peter Pan Ride"
 
CDavid

CDavid

Well-Known Member
DougK said:
My first choice would be to eliminate the Disney Dining Plan completely but since we know that's not going to happen I think that Signature Dining, if it HAS to be part of the Disney Dining Plan at all, should be 1.5 credits instead of two. That would be more in line with the value of the credits compared to non-Signature places.

But again I would rather see a return to the pre-dining plan era. Or maybe just eliminate the Signature restaurants from the dining plans completely.

Or for yet another idea which still fits into Disney's "packages and plans" way of selling things, have a Signature Dining Plan. I know they kind of have this now with the Premium and Platinum Plans but those also include lots of other stuff like tours, golf, etc. I am talking about only dining, mugs and snacks like the other dining plans. Buying this plan would be the only way to dine at Signature restaurants using a dining plan. Just a thought.
Click to expand...


I'd love to see the dining plan go away, which as you note certainly isn't going to happen, but WDW should at least consider removing some more popular restaurants from participation in the plan. Be Our Guest and a few others are still going to be packed with cash-paying customers regardless; There's really no actual need for them to take the plan (other than guests' preference), and by not being part many diners would be shifted over to fill tables at currently less popular eateries. As a benefit, non-participating dining menus might actually improve - imagine that!

Better still, perhaps, why not copy the cruise line model for Palo, and simply add a (cash) surcharge for dining at Signature dining locations (or even a surcharge for restaurants not on the dining plan).
 
Computer Magic

Computer Magic

Well-Known Member
DougK said:
My first choice would be to eliminate the Disney Dining Plan completely but since we know that's not going to happen I think that Signature Dining, if it HAS to be part of the Disney Dining Plan at all, should be 1.5 credits instead of two. That would be more in line with the value of the credits compared to non-Signature places.

But again I would rather see a return to the pre-dining plan era. Or maybe just eliminate the Signature restaurants from the dining plans completely.

.
Click to expand...
I like the 1.5 credit idea . This would give me one more table service for our stay. I like the pre-dining era 2002 (http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=199158&perpage=15&pagenumber=1). Some of the key points here is MAGICAL WISHES FEATURE that allowed souvenirs, shows and tours.

If you go back to allowing credits towards non-dinning would free up ADRs.

I would add you can make the Signature Dining worth 2 credits. Some don't know that you can get a smoothie for the non-alcohol drink. Of course you can not go there and get the least expensive entrée.
 
luv

luv

Well-Known Member
BryceM said:
I like both. I'm a big sucker for roller coasters in the dark with good theming. But I also love a good, thrilling coaster... Like Sheikra or Montu.
Click to expand...
I like both, but IMO, the big coasters are more of a thrill outdoors. :)
 
CDavid

CDavid

Well-Known Member
ChrisFL said:
How big do you want the show building to be?
Click to expand...


Well, even outdoors if you could hide from view the structural steel framework of the coaster behind a facade, berm, or scenery (rockwork would help immensely) from outside the attraction, then I suppose I could live with that. Just so long as the trackwork isn't too obtrusive on the ride itself (please disguise any visible steel supports as trees or stone pillars or something) and, again, is completely obscured from the rest of the park.

To the point about impressonistic theming (which I think is reaching a bit to call it theming), Disney attractions have always been about all the little details which, while perhaps not obvious to the casual observer, still make a real difference in (if they do not actually define) the overall experience. Impressionism isn't a bad thing, nor are WDW fans unappreciative of the concept, but it does largely fly in the face of nearly sixty years of Disney theme park tradition. There's a reason Disney has traditionally done things that way, and it's the same reason people look at Disney parks differently today than they do Six Flags or even Universal (even after the gap has narrowed).
 
Figments Friend

Figments Friend

Well-Known Member
Bolna said:
I also found it way too dark in the restaurant for dinner, to a level that was not attractive anymore. And I could even argue that it's not really authentic. From everything I read people who had castles like this usually were able to afford enough candles and mirrors to light the place up. And the scene from the movie seems to be in brighter light as well.
Click to expand...

Good point regarding the lighting.
I am just guessing here, but it would seem the lighting is dim to enhance the effect of the falling snow *outside* the ballroom windows.
The effect would be less noticeable if the lighting was a bit brighter.
 
lebeau

lebeau

Well-Known Member
BryceM said:
I surely hope Skull Island doesn't replace Toon Lagoon. I'd rather just Toon Lagoon stay than have that happen. It would be terrible to have too such similar islands next to each other (Jurassic Park and Skull Island).

I actually can't think of anything worthwhile to replace Toon Lagoon. Maybe the long rumored Monster Island? Jurassic Park surely doesn't need to be expanded. It's already a HUGE island.
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a Lord of the Rings hint/slip from @marni1971
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
There is nothing wrong with Be Our Guest, it's overhyped but that's not really a problem. I think the biggest problem with the Fantasyland expansion is that they missed the opportunity to put in a Tangled ride. That should have been the Snow White replacement.
Click to expand...


I still think there was a suboptimal use of space in the FLE. That's the frustrating thing about WDW construction sometimes is that they just build, but don't try to efficiency use the space.

They could have buried a dark ride in the base of the 7DMT (I think it would have been perfect for a Sleeping Beauty ride or Tangled would have been a good option as well) -- it's a big footprint and attaching a show building to park of it could have been done, in an area where the tracks are higher anyway. Another option would have been to put the Fairytale Hall in the location of the Fairytale Garden and either keep SWSA or replace it with a different IP (if they didn't want two Snow White rides) -- the Fairytale Garden, if needed to be kept to highlight current movie characters, could have be placed in the Hub on the other side of the castle.
 
lebeau

lebeau

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
There is nothing wrong with Be Our Guest, it's overhyped but that's not really a problem. I think the biggest problem with the Fantasyland expansion is that they missed the opportunity to put in a Tangled ride. That should have been the Snow White replacement.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem with the Fantasyland expansion was the complete lack of ambition. You could call it modest, but it might be more accurate to call it lazy. It's pretty but oh so empty. You have to wonder how anyone could have looked at this expansion and expected guests to be satisfied with it when there is so little to do.

As a beautification project, it's fine. But as the only major project in Disney World for several years running, it is an insult. Especially when Disney has been jacking up price annually while adding next to nothing to their parks.

Another ride, Tangled or something else, would have made a big difference. Also, they shouldn't have cut corners on the ride they did build. The Beauty and the Beast section probably should have had a real attraction too.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
lebeau said:
The biggest problem with the Fantasyland expansion was the complete lack of ambition. You could call it modest, but it might be more accurate to call it lazy. It's pretty but oh so empty. You have to wonder how anyone could have looked at this expansion and expected guests to be satisfied with it when there is so little to do.
Click to expand...

Very true. Belle lived in a poor provincial town, but the opening song alone shows more than two buildings in the town.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom