DEBATE: Ahhhhh!!!! My Eyes!! My Eyes!!!

[Hnymoon@Dixie]

Thanks, now I know which resort NOT to stay at!

 

[Lesley]

As my dh is threatening to make me stay there (I said I'd spend the night at Pleasure Island instead....hmmm, maybe after a long night there the place might look a little better....or it'll just make me vomit for real) in the room right under the word Funky....I'm glad we'll have a lake view.

My dh has a rather bizarre sense of humor.....and he's been warned that he's going to have to be the one to make the ressies because there's no way I'll do it voluntarily.

(shuddering with revulsion)

 

[Jeff in BigD]

That's a special kind of ugly!

About the giant icons everywhere, I agree. Originally they build things smaller than scale to make you feel (psychologically) bigger, but maybe this new trend is to let you know how insignificant you are.

 

[LAinSEA]

Sugar and Caffeine for the eyes...Disney must not think that the "budget-minded" guest wants anything to do with a restful and relaxing vacation. The only thing that picture of Pop Century inspires is "Theme-Park Commando" mode - stay away from the resort for as long as possible!

LOL

I'll be saving my pennies for something more resort-like.

-LA

 

[King Triton]

Oh my God....That is the ugliest hotel I have ever seen in my life.



One word...."tacky"


What was Disney thinking? This has nothing to do with Disney.

It just hurts my eyes just to look at it. Come on Disney....stay with the Disney themes. Don't punish people for staying there.

King Triton

 

[SPAGo 98]

disney is not forcing anyone to stay there... if you think it's ugly, don't stay there. simple as that.

what do the contemporary, the grand floridian, the wilderness lodge, the polynesian, the dolphin, the swan, the yacht club, the beach club, the boardwalk, the coronado springs, the caribbean beach, the dixie landings, etc., have to do with disney?? i don't see any disney themes in these hotels... the only one that "has to do with disney" is the all stars because they have giant disney things all over it....

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I can't necessarily see how the value resorts are a bad thing.

I will not go into it now, Mr. Kidds, but I will leave you with the one underlying principle that applies equally to the Sports & Music as well as the Floridian.

Their concept and mere existence drastically altered the Disney Standard.

Please don't cavalierly ignore this idea or skim too quickly over it. It is at the very root of the philosophical differences between "Walt's" Disney and Disney®. And the funny thing is it works up the scale the same way it works down.

Please think about it for a while. Mull it over and see if it doesn't make just a little bit of sense. Especially if you're reading one of those Walt bios you promised to brush up on. Keep it in the back of your mind as you read and I think you'll get the concept. You may not agree, but at least you'll understand what I'm trying to say!!

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by SPAGo 98
disney is not forcing anyone to stay there... if you think it's ugly, don't stay there. simple as that.

what do the contemporary, the grand floridian, the wilderness lodge, the polynesian, the dolphin, the swan, the yacht club, the beach club, the boardwalk, the coronado springs, the caribbean beach, the dixie landings, etc., have to do with disney?? i don't see any disney themes in these hotels... the only one that "has to do with disney" is the all stars because they have giant disney things all over it....

I'm not a huge fan of the All-Stars nore the New Pop Century....but why does Disney have to be limited to only Themeing Hotels and such after Movies? If that were the case we would have a whole bunch more crappy movies about Space Mt, Big Thunder, The Tea Cups, It's a Small World, Alien Encounter, Astro Jets...and so on.

 

[Magickndm]

I don't think I can stay in a place that actually has the words "PHAT" and "WAZZUP?" actually on it.

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

what do the contemporary, the grand floridian, the wilderness lodge, the polynesian, the dolphin, the swan, the yacht club, the beach club, the boardwalk, the coronado springs, the caribbean beach, the dixie landings, etc., have to do with disney?? i don't see any disney themes in these hotels

The Disney Touch had a lot to do with theming being in service of a story. The Contemporary was themed as the hotel of Tomorrow, the backdrop for Tomorrowland; the Poly, GF, Y&BC and Boardwalk all have backstories that put you in a different place or time. The Swan and Dolphin don't count, they aren't even Disney hotels, and were never themed, only decorated.

I think there is a big difference between the kind of immersive theming that puts you in the story, on the set, as it were; and the merely decorative theming that does nothing beyond providing a gigantic saxophone for your photo-op enjoyment.

When you're the Wilderness Lodge, you detect an obvious effort and intent to "take you away" from Central Florida in the year 2002. When you're in the All-Stars, you are fully aware that you are in a hotel in Central Florida in the year 2002.

The story-based theming used to be a unique hallmark of Disney. If pasting up huge icons is all "Disney" means, then there's a pizza place down the road from me that has better "Disney" theming than any of the on-site resorts.

-WFH

 

[WDWHound]

Spago: The theme of contemporary was the future. They implemented it by creating a futuristic (at the time) environment in which to stay. They did not do it by putting up a fifty foot tall astronaut and huge futuristic sayings like "Beam Me Up". The Poly's them was implemeted by creating a tropical village, not a fifty foot tall hula dancer and a giant "ALOHA".

The Disney parks used to be all about emersion. Every park, every resort was designed to sweep you away to another world. These worlds were a Disneyfied version of reality. They were worlds where magic was the norm and the sharp edges were all buffed off. Visiting a Disney resort used to be about being emersed in a magical world that one could not normally experience. You stayed in a hotel of the future, a remote Polynesian village, a Wilderness Resort from the 30s, a small town on the bayou, a carribean island... you get the idea. The theming was meant to create another world. What world is Pop century supposed to create? The Land of the Giants from the seventies?

If they wanted to do a pop culture hotel, why did it have to be themed with huge icons and clashing paint jobs. Why couldnt the seventies hotel had been themed like a seventies hotel? The staff could wear tie dyed shirts and faded jeans. The rooms could have lava lamps. You could put old pong and space invaders games in the lobby. American Bandstand would be available on your TV. The resort could feature a disco themed restauant. The possiblilies are endless. The fifties area would be even easier, poodle skirts, drive ins, coonskin caps, fifties music everywhere. Wouldn't it be great to stay to in a economy resort like these?

You see the difference. The goal would be to transport you back to the pop culture of another time. You would spend your stay living in a Disneyfied version of the 50's,60's, or 70's, rather than worrying if that giant yoyo is going to fall over and crush you. When I finish my stay at a resort, I want to be able to say more than "Gee, that was a really big bowling pin". In fact, giant Icons, because they are so unreal, distract from theming, rather than add to it.

I know kids love the giant icon resorts, but we already have 3 of them in the All Stars. Did we really need another one? I am just afraid that Disney has decided imersive theming is too expensive, so from now on they will just throw up a giant icon and call it theming. There are some newer resorts that give me hope, the AK Lodge in WDW and The Grand Californian in the DLR). Resorts like these should be the rule, but I fear they are becoming the exception.

 

[DisneyKidds]

WFH - If I knew how to copy a whole post I would. It is not often I can agree with each and every word and the underlying sentiment of one of your posts - but bravo. You very eloquently hit the nail on the frozen head. Ditto Mr. Hound on the mental picture of the differences between what the values give us and all the others.

That being said - I think there is a place for the value resorts and there is a reason why you can get them for less than $75 bucks a night. To create the 70's hotel that Hound describes would not have allowed Disney to go cheap - whatever their motivation for cheap was. I quess the question becomes - was Disney trying to create great resorts and ultimately created horrible resorts because they were cheap, or did they specifically go cheap to give the WDW going public, some who might never have been able to come, more options for being able to stay on site? I could only guess here, but could Disney have realized the same revenue stream with better resorts that had less rooms available at a higher price? Or did they decide to open things up to more people. I wonder what the operating numbers look like for CSR vs. All Stars. Anyone know?

BTW Mr. von Baron - I will get around to reading one of those books so I might be a more worthy adversary when we discuss the merits, or lack there of, of less than deluxe WDW hotels .

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

Scoop,

"Mr Headsicle" is also acceptable...

I don't mean to get into semantics, but I would say that Graves' concept of what "theming" means has more in common with what I'm calling "decoration."

Technically, I think I remember that even the All-Stars do have a back-story (or maybe it was _had_ a backstory... my memory's kinda fuzzy right now), but the implementation was tactically different from the way it was done at the earlier resorts.

I apologize for the hand-waving going on in this conversation... we're in an area where we're all using some generic terms that have become personally loaded, and mean slightly different things to the poster and to the reader.

However we want to make the "theme style" distinction; story-theming/iconic-theming, immersive theming/decorative theming, or even simply theming/decoration, when it comes to the theming, the Swan and Dolphin are more like the Value Resorts than they are the Deluxe Resorts.

I guess that would be the follow-up question I had for you... did you bring up this point because you disagree with the underlying premise that the S/D and the Values exhibit theming that is markedly different in style and scope from the other resorts we're talking about, or is it that you see a difference and are simply pointing out that this particular attempt to quantify that difference fails semantically?

-WFH

 

[SPAGo 98]

Originally posted by WDWHound
Spago: The theme of contemporary was the future. They implemented it by creating a futuristic (at the time) environment in which to stay. They did not do it by putting up a fifty foot tall astronaut and huge futuristic sayings like "Beam Me Up". The Poly's them was implemeted by creating a tropical village, not a fifty foot tall hula dancer and a giant "ALOHA".

i know they're THEMED, but they are not themed to anything DISNEY, unless disney has some sort of copyright on the future, the tropics, the national parks or the beach...

 

[YoHo]

Spago, I don't think anyone was Questioning the lack of Disney related theme.
In fact when WDW was built, they purposely avoided a DIsney theme. A Disney theme was not to ever happen at Walt Disney World.

The problem people have with Pop Century is that it doesn't tell a story. It's a bunch of props randomly placed around some clashing colored buildings.

Now, I have to take issue with a previous poster who suggested that the Theming for Pop Century or AS was less expensive to build. I must respectfully disagree. Aside from the greenery, the planting etc. which may not even be a large cost to absorb given how Large WDW's full time gardening staff must be. It would not have cost significantly more to Create a budget hotel around lets s say a Meditarranian Theme (we have plenty of existing hotels to compare to, but I want to stay theoretical here.) Spend the money used to build the giant Icons on some fountains and stucco and perhaps decorative Tile. (they make lovely low cost high ware Ceramics that can mimic just about anything)

Construction costs would be largly the same I'm sure.

The only realy differences between deluxe moderate and Value resorts are
Exterior Hallways vs. Interior
Sit down eateries/number of food options
Porximity of NON-Bus transportation/Theme Park Access
Number of Services and Amenities.

With the Exception of the exterior hallways and possibly the Eateries, those difference don't affect construction costs at all and the eatery costs are covered by the extra money from food service.


I am all for Value resorts (I question the need for moderates and the 3 tiers), but I really don't think that the construction costs would be much different for a more traditionally Disney Themed value resort (a concession for my good friend Mr. Curling) of the same size.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Construction costs would be largly the same I'm sure.

The 'cheapness' (we should probably use 'economical construction') is evident in much more than the decoration. To say the main difference between CSR and AS/PC is a fountain, some stucco and tile does no justice to CSR, or gives way too much credit to AS/PC. Granted, some of the icons at AS/PC probably cost a pretty penny. However, at AS the courtyards and walkways are basic, the pools are basic - everything is basic. At CSR you have lots of nice walkways, elaborate fountains around every corner, nice courtyards with sitting areas, all built around a lake. There is a great themed pool, in addition to quiet pools that are nicer than the feature pools at AS. Each of the moderates is similar in this regard. Then you have the buildings themselves. Yes, CSR and AS/PC have exterior hallways in common - but that is the extent of the similarity. Each of the moderates have buildings that have some interesting architechture that fits a theme - the southwest structures of CSR with many elevated walkways, staircases, and details. The bayous and mansions of PO, the different countries of CBR. AS/PC are boxes with a railing and some decoration thrown on. All this represents a big difference in cost I'm sure. The large scale and amount of detail in the deluxes comes at even greater expense. I can buy a drafting program that would likely give me adequate plans to build the AS/PC. Something like the GF required a talented architect. The mods are somewhere in the middle. I'm not sure how many of the deluxes or mods you have stayed at - but there are many more differences than the ones you note.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

OH MY GOD!!!! I GOT TO GET HOOKED UP AT WORK AGAIN!!!!!!!!

Again, very abstract, but also very much a detailed story...next time anyone is at WDW, I'd recommend taking the tour or reading Glo's description and then view the S/D in that context. You still might think it looks ugly but I think you'll at least understand more than simply decorating was going on here.

Yeah!! There sure was. And not one brick, nail or lick of paint was Disney in style or substance!!!!!

I haven’t read every word of every thread, but I think you guys have lost your heads (even the frozen one)!!! It has nothing to do with story, or background or any such thing. And while I like my motorcycle friend:

The only really differences between deluxe moderate and Value resorts are
Exterior Hallways vs. Interior
Sit down eateries/number of food options
Proximity of NON-Bus transportation/Theme Park Access
Number of Services and Amenities.

That’s all BS too!! That’s the “stuff” that Disney had to do in order to get the public to buy into the caste system! THEY HAD TO SHOW A DIFFERENCE!!!

The real answer lies in Walt’s original intent for Disneyland, which was carried over to the Marvin Davis's original master plan (number 11). It has to do with what Walt knew and loved! The movies!! He wanted to create 3-dimensional movies!! That’s really it. Just go see the One Man’s Dream exhibit in MGM. It says it all. The places they created in Disneyland and later in WDW (pre-Ei$ner) were MOVIE SETS!!!! Three-dimensional places that were supposed to transport you to another time or another place!!! It’s that simple. The Poly does that, hands down! The Contemporary used to do that, hands down!! The Floridian could do that, but for it’s opulence. The moderates, with some rose-colored glasses do that (but not hands downs). But the All Stars don’t even come close!!! There is nothing ‘movie set” about them. Unless, of course you’re making a movie about a giant icon motel!!

 

[d-r]

You know, the thing is, if they are going to charge less for value hotels then they can't be as nice as the deluxes or the moderates, or why would anybody pay more to stay at the deluxes or moderates?

Like a lot of people, the thing that really bugs me about the appearance of this place is the big words and catch phrases. They are just cheesy and dumb.

Besides that, it should be fun enough for the folks who like it - I don't have a problem with disney building it. I still believe that the "decades" concept was a way to put in icons from disney movies because all star movies was the most requested of the all stars. People like the big icons of disney characters - this was a way to put in more of that (I just wish that they hadn't gotten so crazy with the wording). Actually, the interior shots that I saw looked sort of cool - the furniture was all retro and sort of neat.

I stayed at all stars once to see what it was like, and it wasn't my favorite, but it makes a lot of sense, too. I can see that. For families who want to spend most of their time in the parks or out doing stuff, why not. And for groups of kids and stuff, sports and movies makes a lot of sense (I see this as adding on to the all star movies concept by adding more character icons).

Anyway, what I'm surprised about from this picture is that there are value rooms with a water view - I wonder how they will handle that? Will people pay more to stay in a value with a water view? It seems sort of weird to me.

DR

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by SPAGo 98

i know they're THEMED, but they are not themed to anything DISNEY, unless disney has some sort of copyright on the future, the tropics, the national parks or the beach...

Tomorrowland, Adventureland, Frontierland, Fantasyland/Main St. USA.

 

[DisneyKidds]

but I now find S/D just about the most immersive resort at all of WDW when it comes to "living in a story".

I'll join in the off topic S/D banter .

Now Scoop, I like the S/D as well. We stayed there and enjoyed it. The location is great. The hotels are very nice. It is interesting to hear about some of the abstract architectural design meant to paint a picture of sorts. However, 99.9999% of those that stay there probably don't see or get it, most likely including yourself until Glo pointed it out. This, in and of itself, shows that the resort is not all that 'immersive' when it comes to the story. Even if the architecture itself invoked in everybody what it was intended to, the themeing seems to end at the architectural detail. Where are the sights, sounds, and smells outside of the structures themselves that keep the theme going, the kind you can find at the WL or Poly? I can appreciate great architecture and I agree that the S/D deserve much more credit than being big ole non Disney hotels with some decorations. Viewing them as such is an insult to the very well respected achitects that designed them. However, in regard to your statement, I have to say.......

Man Overboard!!