WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
I think you have forgotten where this is all taking place.... DISNEY WORLD.....not like i'm against it.... :lookaroun
-WondersOfLife
The last original pavilion. :king:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Why no "Classy" value resorts
- Thread starter rcapolete
- Start date
I think you have forgotten where this is all taking place.... DISNEY WORLD.....not like i'm against it.... :lookaroun
-WondersOfLife
The last original pavilion. :king:
Marge10369
Member
You both are my heroes! :sohappy: You said it so well, but I would like to add one more thing...all the hotels are themed...that's what makes them different from the off park locations...My husband and I (both 59) stay at The Coronado most of the time, because yes, it seems to a bit more on the adult side...but have enjoyed the values also. For Disney to put an every day hotel on the park would be business stupid!
MickeyPeace
Well-Known Member
She said classy. cringe
Sigh. I realize you're a teenager so you literally don't know what you're missing (not your fault, you weren't even alive when the decline started). But it's depressing to me that there's a whole generation of people who don't know what Disney was like prior to the marketing shift.
mp2bill
Well-Known Member
I didn't read all the replies so this may be redundant, but it's probably because they're designed with families in mind, so the current themes accomplish 2 things: 1) Without huge, in depth themes, it makes them more affordable, and 2) kids are more likely to enjoy bright, cartoonish themeing rather than subtle, more grown up themeing.
CaptainJackNO
Well-Known Member
I don't know that I would say that WDW has declined. I think many of us, myself included, seem to remember some things better than they may have been. Now, has better attention to the parks been paid in the past? I would say absolutely. But, as far as the value resorts and moderates being themed, I see no problem there. What happened when the major marketing shift occurred back in 1987 was that Wells and Eisner made on property stays affordable for a large number of guests that prior to this push would have been forced to stay off property. WIthout this revenue, you would not have all of the options you have today.
I have no problem with the value resorts, or moderate resorts, having Disney themeing. You have to look at a few things when thinking of this. First, Walt's idea for Disneyland was born from a number of letters of children requesting the ability to visit with Mickey, Snow White, etc. So, characters have always been a major part of what Disneyland and, later, WDW is.
Now, the major thing, I believe, people don't consider when it comes to the Moderates is the rate at which prices, not just at WDW but all over the U.S., progressed between the 1990's and today. Because of the ramping up of prices, there became a gray area between what would normally be the target demographic that Disney pursued for value and moderate resorts. If you stay at Moderates often, you will notice there are mostly families with young kids. Since these families are a nice chunk of what WDW attracts, you have to have features at these resorts that specifically targets children, as well as adults. I find the Nemo theming at CBR rather understated. It is, in no way, close to the over the top theming of the values.
What I think you see in each of the levels of Disney resort is a fading of Disney theming. You have the values which specifically targets families with young children with the over the top Disney character theming. Then, you have the moderates where there is a mix of young families and older people and families with older children who do not necessarily look for Disney theming. Then, you have the Deluxe resorts which have theming but more sophisticated and not so Disney centered that appeals to the older demographic who prefer to stay in a unique themed environment devoid of childish tones. So, ultimately, it appears Disney has set up the resorts to appeal to the many different facets of family life. Young, between, and older. And when I say older, I do not mean "old" , I mean with a more mature interest base.
Just because WOL is a teen or younger does not discount their opinion. We, as older folks, should be careful not to discount their views of things Disney because we think "we" lived through the golden years of WDW. Fact is, most of us are older, more cynical, and tend to view the Disney refillable mug as half empty. Just read the thousands of threads of what's "wrong" with WDW now.
Fact is, I think the young folks are closer to the truth. Because they are looking at WDW through the same eyes we did years ago. They aren't looking for what's wrong. They are looking at the fun they have, the memories they have made, and the way they feel when they are at WDW. Should we hold WDW to high standards? Absolutely, especially given the hefty investment we all make when visiting. However, I think we could learn a thing or two about these parks from younger folks too.
MarkTwain
Well-Known Member
Before this thread gets too out of hand, I just wanted to point out that nobody is criticizing the idea of a value hotel, or the smart money-saving mentality of the people that stay in them. I agree completely that if you are someone looking to save a little money, or spend so much time away from the room that you don't much care about where you stay, then the values are a great choice. The OP's simple question (and a fair one) is simply why Disney chose to design them the way they did.
Traditional Disney theming (eg, the kind used in all four theme parks, the deluxe hotels, and the moderates) is about using design to make you feel like you've been immersed in a different environment, often by imitating the actual architecture of existing places (The Polynesian, Wilderness Lodge, Frontierland, Port Orleans French Quarter, Asia at Animal Kingdom, etc.). Pop and the All-Stars discarded this idea in favor of what are basically concrete block hotels with giant props attached. Some question (like me) if this is as effective in creating an immersive, aka "Disney," environment as the previously mentioned method, or if the money used to create the giant props and signs could have been instead put to use for more immersive theming. But no one is criticizing the people that choose to stay there.
Just wanted to clear that up.
Traditional Disney theming (eg, the kind used in all four theme parks, the deluxe hotels, and the moderates) is about using design to make you feel like you've been immersed in a different environment, often by imitating the actual architecture of existing places (The Polynesian, Wilderness Lodge, Frontierland, Port Orleans French Quarter, Asia at Animal Kingdom, etc.). Pop and the All-Stars discarded this idea in favor of what are basically concrete block hotels with giant props attached. Some question (like me) if this is as effective in creating an immersive, aka "Disney," environment as the previously mentioned method, or if the money used to create the giant props and signs could have been instead put to use for more immersive theming. But no one is criticizing the people that choose to stay there.
Just wanted to clear that up.
FutureCastMembe
Member
I dont know very many kids who are mostly excited about the hotel they were staying at ya know? If it has a bed, pool, food, and a bus to the parks, the kids don't really care about what resort they stay ar, I think the resorts are mostly for the adults to be honest....
Sorry, but when someone says WDW is focused on cartoons and (implies that it) can't be "too cartoonized", I reserve the right to point out that it didn't used to be that way and that 20 years ago, the only place you found cartoons was in Fantasyland, the Main Street Cinema, the Animation Tour and the parking lot names. It is not denigrating WondersofLife's youth to recognize that while his opinion of the resort may accurately represent WDW's marketing and behavior during his entire lifetime, it does not accurately represent WDW's marketing and behavior during the resort's lifetime.
He's entitled to his opinion, as I am mine.
CaptainJackNO
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with you, including your points about the cartoonish nature as of late.
I, too, liked it better when the cartoon characters, such as the unmentioned character whose name rhymes with itch, remained in fantasyland. We agree on those points.
No problems here.:wave:
Minnie1976
Well-Known Member
I have to agree. When we started taking the children in the 70's, we stayed at Days Inn's, Holiday Inn's, etc. Every once in awhile we would stay in one of the trailers in Fort Wilderness. They never cared. What they loved was going to the Magic Kingdom and Epcot! Then when they were almost grown MGM and Animal Kingdom came along. The hotel they stayed in was never a big thing.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Nope. No sarcasm. I think Disney World is becoming too cartoonified. What's more, i also think that 'the more cartoons, the less WDW feels like Disney'.
Animal Kingdom, Future world, the Contemporary - these scream Disney to me. Cartoon fish and humanoid talking cars scream 'Nickelodeon / Universal / Cheap Carnival' to me.
As irony (or luck) would have it, the post abvove yours expressed it perfectly:
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
This. When I was young, all I cared about was the parks and River Country.
Every hotel we stayed in had a pool and I somehow always got fed some food by my parents too. I couldn't care less about the hotel back then.
WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
Before this thread gets too out of hand, I just wanted to point out that nobody is criticizing the idea of a value hotel, or the smart money-saving mentality of the people that stay in them. I agree completely that if you are someone looking to save a little money, or spend so much time away from the room that you don't much care about where you stay, then the values are a great choice. The OP's simple question (and a fair one) is simply why Disney chose to design them the way they did.
Traditional Disney theming (eg, the kind used in all four theme parks, the deluxe hotels, and the moderates) is about using design to make you feel like you've been immersed in a different environment, often by imitating the actual architecture of existing places (The Polynesian, Wilderness Lodge, Frontierland, Port Orleans French Quarter, Asia at Animal Kingdom, etc.). Pop and the All-Stars discarded this idea in favor of what are basically concrete block hotels with giant props attached. Some question (like me) if this is as effective in creating an immersive, aka "Disney," environment as the previously mentioned method, or if the money used to create the giant props and signs could have been instead put to use for more immersive theming. But no one is criticizing the people that choose to stay there.
Just wanted to clear that up.
Thank you i couldn't have but it much better when i started this thread.
I have stayed in all three categories of hotels and loved them all but it would still be nice to have a value option other then the ones there are currently
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
1) My trip this year will most probably be first week ultra budget offsite, second week All Stars Music. I expect a level of (absent) luxury according to 'you get what you pay for'.
2) I wish that Disney would've chosen a different aesthetic for its value resorts. 'Oversized props + exuberant colour scheme' is a bit tacky to begin with, and gets old real soon.
The two statements above do not exclude one another. :shrug:
2) I wish that Disney would've chosen a different aesthetic for its value resorts. 'Oversized props + exuberant colour scheme' is a bit tacky to begin with, and gets old real soon.
The two statements above do not exclude one another. :shrug:
TinkerBelle8878
Well-Known Member
Maybe something more in line with how CB was when it first opened as the first lower priced resort. It was clearly not as lovely as the Grand Floridian, Poly, or Contemp, but it had its own charm. Also centered around a 'main' building with food and check in, and outdoor hallways. So its not too difficult.
The Values as they are, and the new Animation resort, look like a preschooler got at the orignal drawings with tempra paint and stickers. THey're cute, they're fun, but if Disney would never make the $$$ hotels like that, why make all the Values the same? They can still have themed exteriors and mail buildings, just maybe use a lighter hand when it comes to the theming. Whoever's been in charge of the designs seems to have forgotten the 'Less is More' theory of design.
The Values as they are, and the new Animation resort, look like a preschooler got at the orignal drawings with tempra paint and stickers. THey're cute, they're fun, but if Disney would never make the $$$ hotels like that, why make all the Values the same? They can still have themed exteriors and mail buildings, just maybe use a lighter hand when it comes to the theming. Whoever's been in charge of the designs seems to have forgotten the 'Less is More' theory of design.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Disney ought to be daring, creative, artistic in its offerings. I get the impression Disney even deliberatly keeps the artistic value of its value resorts down so as to distinguish them from moderate resorts.
As it stands, in the value and moderate category one can find equal quality at a much lower price offsite. I mean, rockwork + pool slide is not that hard to pull off, they have all got it.
Disney needs to dream bigger. For example, this: http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2008/04/disney-deco.html. 'Disney Deco'.
A faux Art Deco offsite hotel sounds cheap and fake to me. However, a Disney Deco hotel sounds like an absolute dream. Yes, not feasible on budget, but the principle of 'bigger dreams' applies on a budget too.
As it stands, in the value and moderate category one can find equal quality at a much lower price offsite. I mean, rockwork + pool slide is not that hard to pull off, they have all got it.
Disney needs to dream bigger. For example, this: http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2008/04/disney-deco.html. 'Disney Deco'.
A faux Art Deco offsite hotel sounds cheap and fake to me. However, a Disney Deco hotel sounds like an absolute dream. Yes, not feasible on budget, but the principle of 'bigger dreams' applies on a budget too.
Because why then would people pay $200+ to stay at a moderate or Deluxe if they can stay at a Value Resort which offers the same experience?