Star Wars themed land announced for Disneyland

Travel Junkie

Well-Known Member
I could barely stomach it. "Perhaps Disney just doesn't care about the history of the park?" Are they three years old?

Disney has removed or severally altered many historical aspects of the park in the last few years. You may agree or disagree with the decisions Disney has made, but the opinion that Disney has put preserving the history of Disneyland at the bottom of the priority list is very valid and furthermore dismissing and denigrating an any opinion other than your own shows a complete lack of respect for other people.

Over the last few months there have been a few newer posters that have spent most of their time on the forums ripping people for their opinions. Having one opinion and feeling you have to attack anyone who states anything other than something that validates your own opinion is something a child would do.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
What's especially bizarre/infuriating about how management treats the park and its historical aspects is that their entire marketing strategy revolves around nostalgia.
It's all based in the illegitimacy of themed entertainment as a creative medium. It is not a valid place for the establishment of new stories. Therefore film franchises have precedence, but when that isn't there the parks can only recycle what they already have in them. The nostalgia isn't done out of actual nostalgia, but a low view where the audience is seen as so stupid they'll just take the same slop over and over.
 

GiveMeTheMusic

Well-Known Member
It's all based in the illegitimacy of themed entertainment as a creative medium. It is not a valid place for the establishment of new stories. Therefore film franchises have precedence, but when that isn't there the parks can only recycle what they already have in them. The nostalgia isn't done out of actual nostalgia, but a low view where the audience is seen as so stupid they'll just take the same slop over and over.

This is hard to accept for most people, but it's true. There's no passion for the parks product; it's viewed as a channel to promote other things and keep cash flowing when other business units falter.
 

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
It's all based in the illegitimacy of themed entertainment as a creative medium. It is not a valid place for the establishment of new stories. Therefore film franchises have precedence, but when that isn't there the parks can only recycle what they already have in them. The nostalgia isn't done out of actual nostalgia, but a low view where the audience is seen as so stupid they'll just take the same slop over and over.

Exactly. This is the reason Disney loves to quote the "Disneyland will never be completed" statement from Walt Disney repeatedly whenever they make a decision they know the hardcore/purist Disneyland fans will be angry about.
 
D

Deleted member 107043

The nostalgia isn't done out of actual nostalgia, but a low view where the audience is seen as so stupid they'll just take the same slop over and over.

Is it because they think the audience is stupid, or because it's what the audience wants and gives the most attention? I'm not a fan of the way Disney has overused franchises in the parks over the past few decades, but I can't deny that the resorts are more popular than ever because their inclusion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Curious Constance

Well-Known Member
Disney has removed or severally altered many historical aspects of the park in the last few years. You may agree or disagree with the decisions Disney has made, but the opinion that Disney has put preserving the history of Disneyland at the bottom of the priority list is very valid and furthermore dismissing and denigrating an any opinion other than your own shows a complete lack of respect for other people.

Over the last few months there have been a few newer posters that have spent most of their time on the forums ripping people for their opinions. Having one opinion and feeling you have to attack anyone who states anything other than something that validates your own opinion is something a child would do.
I may be newer, but I've never "ripped" anyone on here for their opinion. Even if I disagree, I've never been disrespecful to anyone on this forum. I wasn't even commenting on the validity of the opinion that Disney has put reserving the history of Disneyland at the bottom of the priority list. I don't necessarily totally disagree with that statement. I was commenting on how ridiculous their comment sounds, acting like Disney is a person who doesn't care about something anymore sounded to me like something a little kid would say to their parent when they were mad about something.
 

Travel Junkie

Well-Known Member
I may be newer, but I've never "ripped" anyone on here for their opinion. Even if I disagree, I've never been disrespecful to anyone on this forum. I wasn't even commenting on the validity of the opinion that Disney has put reserving the history of Disneyland at the bottom of the priority list. I don't necessarily totally disagree with that statement. I was commenting on how ridiculous their comment sounds, acting like Disney is a person who doesn't care about something anymore sounded to me like something a little kid would say to their parent when they were mad about something.

You called the author of that article and by proxy anyone who agreed with it a 3 year old and you could barely stomach it basically saying it made you want to vomit. That's dismissive and disrespectful.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Is it because they think the audience is stupid, or because it's what the audience wants and gives the most attention? I'm not a fan of the way Disney has overused franchises in the parks over the past few decades, but I can't deny that the resorts are more popular than ever because their inclusion.
Correlation is not causation.
 
D

Deleted member 107043

Maybe not, but surely at some point in the 80s and 90s, as Eisner churned out one successful IP after another, leveraging franchises in the theme parks became a defining strategy to distinguish competing theme resorts from one another. With Disney's US parks almost always at or near capacity there's no question whether the strategy is working. When it comes to the saturation of Disney brands at DL no one is more cynical than me, but I'm not sure that the ongoing practice is simply because management thinks that their audience is "stupid".
 

MoonRakerSCM

Well-Known Member
I've always thought micechatters were 3 year olds... and figured it was common knowledge. Micechat bashing aside...

I've been thinking lately about Disney and mass entertainment and society in general... I've had some discussions with my friends and I've seem to come to the conclusion that opinions on Disneyland run deeper than just entertainment aspects... it's part of modern society itself and how people function these days...

(Prepare yourself for cranky jerk nonsensical ranting overload...)

What I want to know is... why 'should' Walt matter these days? Because he founded the company? Because he created the park? Who cares? Micechat screams that Tom Sawyer's Island is WALT'S ISLAND. So what? Why does that matter to 99% of the people who visit the park every day and spend money there? Should it matter? Why would anyone in today's society give a flying monkey about an island personally designed by a guy over 60 years ago? Nostalgia and history aside, does anyone honestly expect the 99% of visitors to the park to give a care about it? People today are visiting for a quick thrill, and a happy time for their kids... in today's me, me, me, now, now, now smartphone immediate no substance gratification society, we're beyond the point of having small quiet spaces anywhere any more at a payed park like this. Kids will glance at it, proclaim it boring, and move on to the loud noises and shiny lights.

Speaking of quiet spaces etc... (this thought pains me to say it because I am a huge fan of the old west and spend a lot of time myself in abandoned mines and ghost towns out in the desert)... but every time I see someone go on about "they should expand the desert area and rebuild Nature's Wonderland instead of SWL" etc. I think that person is delusional. The old west is not popular anymore and kids do not care about it at all (neither do most parents these days either). It's over, it's done with, people don't want it anymore. The divide is complete, people from cities are into commercialized aspects of life and do not care for things like the old west or rural areas for that matter... it's boring, dirty, and stupid to them. The bases of old American exploration are now all claimed to be bad by society... homesteading, expansion, and mining is now considered evil by city goers and the old ways of the west are considered prejudiced,offensive, foolish, and wrong. People are not allowed to have a romantic or positive view of things any more as society has been trained to be constructive in its views and focus on the negative aspects (lets be honest, there are lots to focus on). Fact is, the frontier is dead and children will no longer be running around Frontierland with 6-shooters wearing coonskin hats because it's too offensive to people on many different levels (choose your evil- gun violence, racism, animal cruelty, environmental concerns, hunting etc.).

The park needs to evolve. It needs to stay relevant, it needs to make money, and needs to play its part in the company. It has been doing this rather well over the past couple of decades (indicated by how successful it is ATM) but 'fans' still scream the sky is falling when things get altered in any way. I think they need to accept reality that has surrounded them, realize that Disney rightfully doesn't give a crap about what they think anymore, and move on. Disney is doing what it needs to do as a company and is applying itself to what matters most, the 99% of the visiting people who spend money at the parks.

SO... if I can sum all my idiocy up...... the park needs to evolve, society is simply too far gone into immediate gratification and flashy things to care about 'small quiet places' or the 'history' of the park, and Disney will do as it needs to stay relevant and successful. Online 'fans' and Disney 'armchair warriors' should realize they have already lost the battle and that they and their opinions no longer matter.

Back to micechat with that in mind, perhaps we can provide a malicious label for the people who no longer matter just as MiceChat did back with the whole 'defender of mediocrity' ordeal. Though, perhaps we're not 3 years old as they are...
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Maybe not, but surely at some point in the 80s and 90s, as Eisner churned out one successful IP after another, leveraging franchises in the theme parks became a defining strategy to distinguish competing theme resorts from one another. With Disney's US parks almost always at or near capacity there's no question whether the strategy is working. When it comes to the saturation of Disney brands at DL no one is more cynical than me, but I'm not sure that the ongoing practice is simply because management thinks that their audience is "stupid".
You're still just insisting that correlation is causation. And there isn't much distinction in copying Universal.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom