Two Spirited Quickees...Imagination closing

[Californian Elitist]

Nearly half of all posts in this thread contain detailed analysis of Disney Channel shows. No wonder these boards are filled with incoherent and poorly written rants. I hope you're all watching from the background with your children and not actually tuning in by yourself because of an obsession with Disney. There is something very creepy about grown men and women recalling specific episodes and plot points of That's So Raven and Lizzie McGuire. Not to be rude but there are programs on other non-Disney networks that are meant for adults that I would hope you would all find more stimulating.

Says the person on a Disney parks website. How ironic.

You've got to be kidding me, BTW. You're saying its abnormal to recall specific childhood television program episodes? My mom is always talking about Fred Flintstone and specific episodes. So what? The Flinstones was her favorite show as a little girl and they bring back nice memories. How would that automatically qualify as having an obsession?

 

[flynnibus]

I'm gonna miss charlie's mom...

 

[PhotoDave219]

Does this mean that DHS is getting Itchy and Scratchy land?

 

[AndyMagic]

Says the person on a Disney parks website. How ironic.

You've got to be kidding me, BTW. You're saying its abnormal to recall specific childhood television program episodes? My mom is always talking about Fred Flintstone and specific episodes. So what? The Flinstones was her favorite show as a little girl and they bring back nice memories. How would that automatically qualify as having an obsession?

I think I assumed the folks who were discussing the shows were older than they were. I wasn't aware you were recalling a time when you were a kid yourself watching the show. I saw discussion happening on how good/bad the NEW Disney Channel shows are which I found odd. Either way, this isn't the thread to be picking apart the hair color changes of Hannah Montana or discussing the hidden metaphors behind Disney's newest abomination of a show, "DOG WITH A BLOG!" I swore someone was joking when I heard that title but apparently it is a real show that humans watch. Sigh. And there is nothing ironic about me posting on a Theme Park discussion forum. Disney Channel's demographic is 9-14 which I don't believe is the average posting age for WDWMagic members.

 

[flynnibus]

I think I assumed the folks who were discussing the shows were older than they were. I wasn't aware you were recalling a time when you were a kid yourself watching the show. I saw discussion happening on how good/bad the NEW Disney Channel shows are which I found odd. Either way, this isn't the thread to be picking apart the hair color changes of Hannah Montana or discussing the hidden metaphors behind Disney's newest abomination of a show, "DOG WITH A BLOG!" I swore someone was joking when I heard that title but apparently it is a real show that humans watch. Sigh. And there is nothing ironic about me posting on a Theme Park discussion forum. Disney Channel's demographic is 9-14 which I don't believe is the average posting age for WDWMagic members.

Well considering that the shows are decided upon, and produced by people who are not 9-14... don't you think gauging the shows, reviewing them, and evaluating them is done by people in large part by those who are not 9-14?

Ever think shows about families... are enjoyed by those than just the kids in the family?

 

[AndyMagic]

Well considering that the shows are decided upon, and produced by people who are not 9-14... don't you think gauging the shows, reviewing them, and evaluating them is done by people in large part by those who are not 9-14?

I guess I just wasn't aware people here were in the business of reviewing and evaluating children's programming to such an extreme degree. I feel like I could write a thesis on the Disney Channel after reading this thread. I made the foolish mistake of commenting on the bizarre discussions instead of just ignoring them since this has resulted in even more posts that are off topic. Those that would like to talk about an upcoming twist on Pretty Little Liars are free to open a new thread to do so.

 

[flynnibus]

I guess I just wasn't aware people here were in the business of reviewing and evaluating children's programming to such an extreme degree

Kind of like we're all in the business of reviewing and evaluating theme parks around the world to such an extreme degree eh?

Just get off the high horse and move on.

Off-topic in a Spirit thread? Surely you jest.

 

[JenniferS]

Hmmm....I thought this thread was going to be about something totally different.

I know, right?!

 

[Californian Elitist]

And there is nothing ironic about me posting on a Theme Park discussion forum. Disney Channel's demographic is 9-14 which I don't believe is the average posting age for WDWMagic members.

I think it's quite ironic, since you insinuated initially that it was childish to be talking about children shows. I bet most people would find adults talking about Disney parks to be childish as well.

There are some fourteen year-olds that post on this site.

 

[71jason]

Says the person on a Disney parks website. How ironic.

You've got to be kidding me, BTW. You're saying its abnormal to recall specific childhood television program episodes? My mom is always talking about Fred Flintstone and specific episodes. So what? The Flinstones was her favorite show as a little girl and they bring back nice memories. How would that automatically qualify as having an obsession?

Two things. First, much like the Disney parks, the Flintstones was never directed exclusively, or even primarily, at children. There's no shame in enjoying it as an adult.

Second, the Flintstones was a quality show. OK, the animation was lacking by theatrical standards, but the writing and voice acting were superb. The sitcoms currently on The Disney Channel are written by failed 80s hacks who just recycle the cliched plots and one-dimensional characters of, say. ABC's TGIF line-up for a generation too young to remember them.* I'm not creeped out by adults watching TV directed at kids--well, the bronies/cloppers are an exception--I'm creeped out that so many people on the board seem to enjoy watching schlock, especially when we're in a new golden age of TV.

* (I know this not from watching them but from an article in EW. Or maybe it was the NYT. I'll cop to having seen maybe a half dozen Zach and Cody episodes, and one with the hot girl who's a nanny--all watched at the request of children in my life.)

 

[Texas84]

Does this mean that DHS is getting Itchy and Scratchy land?

No, that can only happen at DLR. Licensing you know.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

I wouldn't know who Zach and Cody is if they bumped into me. I guess I could say the same thing for all those shows. I'm so out of it... Or just getting old.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

There is a Yeti thread that is even thumb tacksd around here that discusses exactly what is wrong with the Yeti. It would be quite enlightening for you compared to the silliness on wikipedia. Or that article, which didnt actually reveal anything from the company point of view. Just sayin'.

The guest comments are good though, I would agree @marni1971

I found a few comments digging around the status watch thread

I spoke to an EE CM who happened to be visiting another park this weekend, who said that the basic problem is that the foundation beneath the Yeti was not built strong enough. If the Yeti moves, it could eventually cause the Yeti's structure to collapse--onto the coaster. To undertake the work to strengthen the foundation would close the ride for six months. Also said the Yeti can still be fired up, but it takes the energy of a jet engine to get it going.

Hi guys! I'm a relatively new CP working on Expedition Everest, and I thought I'd just drop by and tell you what I've been told about the Yeti. Now, I haven't talked to maintenance directly about the issue, but I've discussed it with a couple of my managers, and they all say pretty much the same thing which is this: that the only way to fix the Yeti is a 6 month complete shut down of EE, which they will not do until DAK gets another E-ticket attraction, simply because they need a way to keep people coming to the park, and they need to have enough attractions to prevent the lines from getting outrageous.

The article:

"The yeti is a complicated Audio-Animatronics figure whose complex functions have presented some challenges affecting its operation," said Walt Disney World spokeswoman Andrea Finger. "We purposely took measures in 2008 to reduce unnecessary stress and preserve many of its functions while we studied possible long-term solutions.
"At this point," she added, "we're still considering those options."

Disney would not discuss issues with the yeti beyond referencing the "stress" caused by the figure's movement. The most popular theory among company followers: The yeti's swiping-arm motion was sopowerful that it has weakened the base of the animatronic, forcing Disney to shut it down to prevent further damage. (The yeti is one of three separate structures that make up Expedition Everest, along with the roller-coaster track and the mountain shell; none of the three structures touches.)

Basically, what it says on the thread is what I already read in the article.

Also, the article did get a quote from Disney, but is Disney seriously going to give them more information? Doubtful

Anyway, I'm more worried about the Avatar nonsense than the Yeti (waiting for the attack)

 

[StarWarsGirl]

I wouldn't know who Zach and Cody is if they bumped into me. I guess I could say the same thing for all those shows. I'm so out of it... Or just getting old.

Don't worry, it was a Disney Channel show. Can't blame you for never having heard of it

 

[bubbles1812]

I found a few comments digging around the status watch thread





The article:





Basically, what it says on the thread is what I already read in the article.

Also, the article did get a quote from Disney, but is Disney seriously going to give them more information? Doubtful

Anyway, I'm more worried about the Avatar nonsense than the Yeti (waiting for the attack)

There is other info beyond what the frontline CMs (whose info I consider mostly worthless) from more trusted sources. I guess they were featured more in other threads. But it's present.

 

[ToTBellHop]

I love a good quickee. Two quickees? Yippee!

 

[AllyInWonderland]

WHAT?!?! I keep forgetting you're a significant amount of years younger than me.

I remember when it used to come on TV, I was just too busy watching Playhouse Disney.

 

[Admiral01]

While I can totally agree that attractions shouldn't be based on television shows, the entire premise of Phineas and Ferb is using one's imagination. Other than the fact that it's a Disney Channel show, how exactly would they not fit in a pavilion about imagination?

I'm going to come across as sounding argumentative, so I apologize in advance. This is a good conversation that I am enjoying.

Using a children's television show like this as the basis for an EPCOT pavilion is wrong. It isn't wrong for a Fantasyland ride necessarily, but it is wrong for an EPCOT attraction of this magnitude. I am sure we can name many tv shows about characters who use their imagination. It isn't up to the caliber that EPCOT should be, and goes along with my feelings regarding Nemo. Just because a Disney property has some attributes that are similar to an EPCOT pavilion (like Nemo and the ocean, or P&F and using your imagination) doesn't mean that they are a good fit for those pavilions. It is lazy and shows a lack of creativity that shouldn't be tolerated.

 

[Matt7187]

I think it's quite ironic, since you insinuated initially that it was childish to be talking about children shows. I bet most people would find adults talking about Disney parks to be childish as well.

There are some fourteen year-olds that post on this site.

*raises hand*

But I don't really like disney channel!

 

[aladdin2007]

I'm going to come across as sounding argumentative, so I apologize in advance. This is a good conversation that I am enjoying.

Using a children's television show like this as the basis for an EPCOT pavilion is wrong. It isn't wrong for a Fantasyland ride necessarily, but it is wrong for an EPCOT attraction of this magnitude. I am sure we can name many tv shows about characters who use their imagination. It isn't up to the caliber that EPCOT should be, and goes along with my feelings regarding Nemo. Just because a Disney property has some attributes that are similar to an EPCOT pavilion (like Nemo and the ocean, or P&F and using your imagination) doesn't mean that they are a good fit for those pavilions. It is lazy and shows a lack of creativity that shouldn't be tolerated.

I agree with you, and fortunately so far there has been no confirmation that this is the plan for Imagination. Lets hope it stays that way.