I don't think that it's fair to say that the division of feelings here boils down only to entitlement. I personally don't agree with the idea that everything should be for everyone, I think there should simply be something for everyone. But, what bothers me is that, while attractions with height restrictions can be seen as rites of passage that one grows into (IE: "I'm FINALLY tall enough to ride Splash Mountain!") Storytime with Belle is something that can potentially be "grown-out" of. And for me, the slight disappointment I feel comes from the understanding that I am already "out". As a twenty-something male with no children, I can only imagine the looks I will get when going to experience this attraction to see the amazing looking Wardrobe and Lumiere animatronics. I don't like the idea that I may have to worry about concerning parents with young children when trying to enjoy the attraction for its technological merits. It's an odd combination that they have here -- high profile tech and design accomplishments mixed in with a show that seems to be meant exclusively for children. Not that I think kids wom't appreciate the show - seeing Lumiere brought to such stunning life is sure to thrill many children and only add to their experience, and I'm glad Disney didn't go the route of playing down to them with less thrilling tech. One day I hope to enjoy this attraction with my kids. But until then, it seems like it would be super awkward for me and the guests around me if I wanted to see it for myself by myself. And why would I want to feel that way or make anyone feel that way in Disney World?
But it's not that I feel entitled - if the park did not charge admission it would be entitlement. I paid eighty-some-odd bucks to see what the park has to offer, and if I can't enjoy some of its best magic because I'm an adult without kids, it's unfair to me as a customer. This isn't Dumbo's play area where I don't feel like I'm missing anything, these are world class animatronics that look to be worth seeing live. Disney has put some really widely appealing content into a context that is somewhat dismissive of that appeal, and I think it's a fair critique to suggest that this is unusual of them, and may be disappointing to some paying guests. They have the right to do whatever they want in the park, but as a customer I have the right to form whatever opinion I feel of the changes that they make. I think this is an enormous step forward from the original attraction, and I applaud that effort. I only wish, now that they've made it into something that I find worth seeing, that it was also not socially unappealing for me to do so. It puts me in a weird position when all I want to see is some brilliant animatronic design work, knowing that not everyone in the room may understand that intention. Maybe if more attractions with elements of this caliber were scattered more frequently throughout the parks (or at least maintained -- yes, you, Mr. Yeti) it wouldn't be as much of a problem. In the meantime, Lumiere looks like he may be the best animatronic in Walt Disney World, and once I pay my admission to the park I am literally just as deserving of quality entertainment as any other guest in the park who paid the same rate that I did. I think it's fair that I want to see him.
