DEBATE: They’ve successfully trained us to “settle”

[DVC-Landbaron]

For those of you who were vigilant, you may have noticed that right around 9:00 this morning, for about five minutes (I told you, you had to be vigilant!) this post was in response to the thread “Screamscape reports...Forbidden Mountain!?!?!”. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it needed it’s own thread. Mainly because I wanted to make a different point than AK – good or bad, which that thread has kind of fallen into. And I also wanted to know what everyone else thinks about this subject and not just the die-hard rumors people who still follow multi-page threads. So, as first submitted...

_______________________


E-Ticket!! E-Ticket!! E-Ticket!! E-Ticket!! E-Ticket!! E-Ticket!!
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!

So, just an E-Ticket will fix all the ills of AK, eh? I think not doctor!!!!

We talk about E-Tickets as if they are the “be-all” and “end-all” of a Disney experience! Well, my friends, I am here to tell you that are not!!

It is the Disney “experience” that is important. An E-Ticket is just one aspect of that experience.

Many, many people on this thread want BK, very badly. And some can’t understand their narrow focus. I think I can shed some light on this rather elusive concept.

Picture, if you will, a Disney of 30 years ago. They build, and present to the public, a very, very “full” day park, two beautiful resorts, themed to the max (for fairly affordable prices), world class golf courses and attached resort, a quaint shopping district, the most luxurious campgrounds imaginable, gobs of shopping and restaurants, two lakes (one they built from nothing and the other they drained and fixed up) and offering many other vacation-like stuff never offered by Disney before (fishing, horseback riding, boating, sailing, etc.). And it all opens on virtually the same day (not quite but within a couple years).

Now, picture, if you will, a Disney of twenty years ago. Even with two guys at the helm that acted like deer caught in the headlights, they build and present to the public – EPCOT! A day and half (at least!) “Disney experience”. (I was tempted to name things individually, as I did in the first paragraph, but let’s face it; it’s just too much typing!)

Clearly!! Clearly, this is a company that knows how to WOW their audience. And shortly thereafter they continue to WOW. They don’t present “rides”, single E-Tickets, or god forbid anything like Dino-rama!! But instead offer us full-blown pavilions. Attractions with a capital “A”!!! Horizons. The Livings Seas. Morocco. And the rumors were plentiful throughout that time. A ‘Space’ pavilion (not just a trill ride). A Movie Pavilion. Switzerland, Spain, Russia, and countless other countries. Exotic resorts. All these things were on the drawing boards at one time or another. In other words they thought BIG.

And the MK was not neglected. Space Mountain was added (not substituted – an important point in these discussions) to an already full park. Thunder Mountain was added (not substituted) to an already full park. Even during the current administration some wonderful things were added, Splash Mountain, the two wonderful water parks, etc. (Thankfully Ei$ner did not yet have a good handle on those wonderful Imagineers who grew up thinking BIG)

But somewhere the thinking began to change. (Hmmm. I wonder if that might be the change in philosophy that many here talk about.) And they next big project was rumored to be wonderful. In fact, it was so wonderful that the original concept (an EPCOT pavilion) was so grand that it required it’s own park!! WOW!!!

But somehow, on opening day, there were quite a few folks that were less than WOWed. The park seemed small. Not as full-blown as we were used to. It’s not that it was bad necessarily, it was just… well… less. On a personal note I was willing to wait for Sunset Boulevard, the section of the park that couldn’t be built on time because of the Universal competition. I was more than willing to wait for my guy, the top mouse (yes, I said my guy! At that point he was my hero) to give us the full “Disney experience”. I was more than a little disappointed when an entire section, what I would consider a “Land” in the MK, opened with only one stinking ride in it! And that ride was a mix of great theming, wonderful story and ROTTEN thrill. Remember? Up, down and out!!

Since then they’ve been throwing us bones. Giving us very small handouts at a time. And they are also cutting what once was. So I can’t blame those that are grateful for what they “give” us (very insightful AV!!), but I fall more in line with those that expect just a little more. Say, like a park that opens full (for full price) and doesn’t have to be ‘grown’ according to some analysts spreadsheet and customer surveys, which more often that not just justifies what that particular manager or executive wants to justify.

So, to wrap up this rather long winded dissertation (who said “finally”?!?) I think many people have come to expect and therefore want ‘more’ from Disney. It doesn’t necessarily have to be Beastly Kingdom. But the need for a full-blown ‘something’ is clearly felt by many (and I admit that I am in that group). It could be Beastly Kingdom, or it could be Australia and the Americas, complete with two (BIG) E-tickets, two D-Tickets, a couple of “C”s and for good measure at least on “A” throw-away, corny something that everyone tries once and can easily be changed.

I think that many feel the same way for Disney in general. Stop changing out attractions for rides (heck! Stop exchanging, period!! And start adding!!). Stop closing attractions and not replacing!! And when they do add, WOW us. WOW us with an experience, not necessarily a thrill. And build things with the Disney standard that we all fell in love with. And part of that standard is size! Things to do! (If you don’t believe me, go back and read AV’s post on the current administration’s philosophy on what constitutes a full day at a park. You will be amazed!!)

Hey Greg. I’m no good at it, but maybe you could provide a link, or maybe AV could go through the whole thing again. I considered it a real eye-opener!!

OK. I’m done. And I want you guys to notice!! Not one single quote!! And no smilies either!! almost!!

 

[larry_poppins]

Wow you certainly did write a dissertation! Just my thoughts in brief...

I certainly expect more than Dinorama and California Adventure.
Beastly Kingdom would be nice, but I have learned not to get excited about anything that Walt Disney Attractions builds in America.

I am very excited about the theming and the E tickets at Tokyo DisneySea. A friend of mine who has been there has told me and I quote, "Quit whining! Disney did build a park you want to visit. You just have to get there!"

And getting there I am. The more I learn and plan for my Tokyo experience the better I feel. I have curtailed my expenditures of the American Disney product to help pay for it. If I enjoy it as much as my friend I will probably be returning there as well

Current Disney management has led me to divorce myself emotionally from the American Company.

Just my thoughts

Larry Nash

 

[Bob O]

I would agree with DVC. When i go to a wdw theme park i expect to be "wowed". And while i enjoyed Ak i wasnt "wowed" or overwhelmed, escpecially considering the amounts of attractions and time needed to visit Epcot/MK in comparsion.
When i always state i want BK it isnt just the thought of another E attraction but a new area themed with many different types of attractions, something that should have been their from day one and not a decade later after people paid milliomns in full admission prices waiting for it to be built. Thats what disney used to do but not is content to rest on their godd name/laurels and give is less rather than more.
And now beside under building Ak they have done little to update Epcot or MK as of late and some of the attractions they have they dont run often if at all and keep closing the park early in hopes you will spend money at Downtown Disney or Mini. golf as examples. They want you out of the parks at night and in other places on the property spending money. It wasnt like that when i used to go but is now.
Lets hope competition will push disney to do a better job or actions by us to hold them too a higher standard will prod them to do a better job. But alas we may only have ABC promo's to look forward too!!!(have to love synergy)

 

[Sandy Fisher]

You guys continue to provide views and details that entertain and enlighten me! For reasons no one else would be interested in, haven't read this board for a week.
Trying to catch up. Rarely give my deep down honest no-holds-barred opinion on things because I hate to be negative and some days that's what it boils down to.
Our first trip to Disney, in 1982, we were wowed. Absolutely, positively wowed. Then we came back when Epcot opened. Again, wowed. How could they top those two parks??!!
When MGM opened and we returned, I was less than happy with it. The only reason we spent more than a couple hours was because it was confusing to get around - no pattern, no logic, etc. And the lines for the big stuff were long and Indiana Jones took forever if you counted standing in line and the show. From that point on we never spent more than a half day. We weren't wowed, but enjoyed our first few times on Star Tours, Indiana, and Movie Ride. Our kids were beyond the kiddie stuff, but liked the Muppet Show.
When AK opened I was ready to be wowed. Getting around the park (much like MGM when new) was so frustrating, hot and tiring. We thought it looked "skimpy" but totally enjoyed Safari and had some good eats. Again, having grown children we didn't spend much time on Bugs, Dinosaurs, etc. But we didn't feel the park was complete. We were back in November (along with adult sons) and other than them doing the Kali River, we did it in a half day.
There's a lot I love about Disney. A lot. Or we wouldn't spend the $$ and time to travel across country to go. But they have talked us into settling for less. Our "world" at WDW has shrunken. Still, no one else does it as well and we've been to many many amusement parks and theme parks. We'll keep hoping for the new event, attraction, or park completion (?) that wows us.
Once again, I really do appreciate the information and insight you guys have. Thanks for interesting reading!
Sorry, didn't mean to ramble. Just got carried away.

 

[Bob O]

Sandy i agree!!! And 1982 was also the year of our first visit!!!

 

[manning]

Well said Walt!! Uh, I mean DVC-Landbaron

 

[Lesley]

I agree with the Landbaron!

Actually I had written a long post about seeing the parks as an art form.....and how AK, though its a beautiful start on what could be a great piece of work, is losing its focus and may never become an example of theme park as an art form like the MK or TDS are. (The post vanished in the course of writing/editing it!)

I honestly believe that the "something" that many can't put their fingers on that seems to be missing these days is that sense of art (I'm referring to those unwashed masses....who seem to say after their WDW trips "it was all right....I don't see a reason to go again...it just seemed...well, I don't know...not what I expected"). And I guess this "training" is to get folks to stop expecting art and get them to expect just a theme park. They will lose visitors over this, and already have...though they won't be able to quantify the why's or how's.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Baron, Baron, Baron............

Just what you have been waiting for I'm sure, someone to disagree with you. I'll be happy to oblige, and unlike you I will use quotes and many smilies .

I would, however, like to congratulate you on your dissertation. It has some very good thoughts (as always ) - and you refrained from using the A word (apologists, that is ).

So here goes..........

We talk about E-Tickets as if they are the “be-all” and “end-all” of a Disney experience! Well, my friends, I am here to tell you that are not!!

How true (see, one of those good thought ). Thanks for trying to educate some of your Car #3 bretheren.

It is the Disney “experience” that is important.

Yes, yes, yes............... (another great thought ).

Want more agreement? I'm with you through your paragraph that has me picturing Disney of 20 years ago. Good stuff, and boy were you getting used to having things a certain way. Well, anyway, that is where I begin to lose you. I am also curious as to why you did not include a paragraph that pictures a Disney of 10 years ago .

Lets take a closer look at where you did and did not go. You mention a lot in the next couple of paragraphs. Full blown stuff, WOWing, big ideas, etc. Morocco, please. Furthermore, many of those big ideas never happened (hmmmm - kind of like BK, huh?)

Lets look at that Disney of 10 years ago and forward. I'll include MGM in there, along with AK. In addition, there was no neglect of the MK. By your own accounts MK opened full, had some great additions, and is a very mature park. Rather foolhardy to continue to expect growth like it experienced in the 80's. That is not from the perspective of someone who settles, either. Parks eventually reach their bounds and bump up against a ceiling. In addition, several rides and shows were updated and added. Lion King show, soon to be Philharmagic. Pooh, Toon Town, Tomorrow Land redo, Buzz, Alien, Aladdin, new and changed live shows, and more. Granted, not everyone likes all of these - but the neglect you imply? I don't think so. And that is just MK during this time. You have a DTD expansion incuding Cirque, Disney Quest, the West Side, more shopping. How about another wonderfully themed water park. A ski lift in a water park - you can't get more Disney than that. Resorts - WL and CSR, along with a few others perhaps less desireable, but growth nonetheless. DVC becomes a wonderful, expanding option. Quite a lot of 'bones'. I'm sure you'll find a way to make them all about Disney making money rather than adding to the 'experience', but I disagree.

Now we must talk about MGM and AK, far from 'bones'. You talk of MGM as small, not full blown. First off, as you point out, it's origins were an Epcot pavillion. Could they really turn a pavillion into a park the size of MK or Epcot? The answer is no. Should Disney continue to build parks the size of MK and Epcot? Again, I say no. That may be what you had become accustomed to, but it doesn't mean doing something else is wrong. I know - you ask, "why shouldn't they build parks the size of MK and Epcot?" Here is why. In MGM and AK I believe the concepts are smaller and more focused. This is not a bad thing as it allows to spend more time developing the things that enhance the 'experience', rather than just giving more to do. I completely disagree with the 'size as part of the standard' concept.

Lets focus on MGM for a moment. The way you describe it, people felt about MGM when it opened the same way many feel about AK today (and I don't hear all that many grumblings about MGM today. Interesting, huh?) People weren't WOWed because MGM didn't meet their expectations, MGM wasn't what they were accustomed to. Boy, sounds a lot like some discussions on AK. How many overlooked attractions were there when it opened? Things like the animation tour that most people probably didn't take the time to do. Sunset Blvd as a "Land"? Maybe what you expected, but I never looked at it that way. Furthermore, ToT may have been disappointing to you, but it was a uniquely Disney take on a free fall concept that is so much less in other places. Ok, the drop was short - crucify them for it. MGM = Smaller Concept = Smaller Park, and smaller concept and smaller park are not bad things unless only something on the scale of MK and Epcot will make you happy. (BTW, same equation for AK) If not, does it mean you are settling? Absolutely not. It means you can evaluate and appreciate a variety of different entertainment in many different forms and presentation formats. It means that you can appreciate the smaller, more intimate scale of a movie studio concept (or animal concept). Who wants cookie cutter parks that just happen to have a different theme? That is not very innovative or original, is it?

I could rehash AK discussions, but I will try not to. All I will say is that it is a full park worthy of full price if you experience all it has to offer. Maybe they targeted the wrong demographic, maybe they misjudged a focus group, whatever it is that make some people dislike it, there is still plenty to do if you are inclined to do it. I'm sick of hearing about DinoRama. How about a little patience. Just like all the other parks had additions, so too will AK. Now that I think about it, MK without all those things you admit were added after the fact would be a bit of a snoozer compared to what it is today (attractions wise that is).

Change in philosophy is a big theme for many, and I don't think anyone has yet argued that there hasn't been some change in philosophy, with both good and bad motivation. However, despite any changes in philosophy, we are stilled WOWed by something new everytime we go to WDW, be it something old or something new.

So, to wrap up this rather long winded dissertation (who said “finally”?!?) I think many people have come to expect and therefore want ‘more’ from Disney.

but I fall more in line with those that expect just a little more.

I see a big part of the problem not that some people expect 'more', but they expect things a 'certain way'. When things aren't delivered the way that they expect it, it is seen as a negative. However, different does not equal wrong. Here is where you fail to see the forrest through the trees. Remember that little thing you mentioned about the 'experience', the thing it is all about. If you focus on all the things that were not what you expected, you miss much of that all important 'experience'. I would use a different "S" word than you. I would use spoiled instead of settling. It is like filet mignon is all you ever eat. A new chef takes over the joint and likes to offer a New York strip. "My, my - I won't eat NY strip" says the Baron. Well, guess what, NY strip has a heck of a lot more flavor.

I'm not saying that Disney hasn't changed - some good, some bad. Yes, philosophy has changed. Yes, mistakes have been made. Yes, cutbacks are a disappointment. Yes, some things could have been done better. Yes, people probably said the same thing 10 and 20 years ago. However, the 'experience' is there, waiting for you to take it in. The danger is, if you focus on these changes or disappointments to you, you might miss the experience. You have said before that when you are there WDW is great, and when you get back you reflect on the negative. Well, Mr. Baron, experience is the here and now, and you admit it is great while you are there at the time - and the 'experience' is what it is all about. Enjoy your forthcoming three week experience .

If it so pleases the court, that is the dissenting opinion of the minority .

p.s. Leslie - I have to disagree. If anything, AK is too much the unappreciated art form. Disney was not trying to 'train' us to forget the art and accept just a theme park, they went for more. The fact that some didn't get an adequate 'theme park' is why it is so criticized. Disney wanted to give people art, but it is not what they expected - a theme park - so they are disappointed.

 

[Bob O]

MGM was built small because they wanted it completed before the larger Universal Studios was built. If not for the competition i believe it would have opened as a bigger park than it did.
Now AK was built small for the sole purpose to save money and too start making money right away with the intention of giving the guest less bang for there buck. What i wanted in AK was what they told us it was going too be, not a scaled down version so they could soak the guests!!

 

[Peter Pirate]

what I wanted in AK is what they told us it was going to be.

Who told us what? We have internet information, we have AV's 'inside info' and we have our perceptions, but when exactly did Disney tell us AK was going to be 'all of these things'? Sure we Disney geeks have ferreted things out and we're good at reading between the lines but were these grandiose plans really promised to us?

 

[hopemax]

Who told us what? We have internet information, we have AV's 'inside info' and we have our perceptions, but when exactly did Disney tell us AK was going to be 'all of these things'? Sure we Disney geeks have ferreted things out and we're good at reading between the lines but were these grandiose plans really promised to us?

"The Making of Disney's Animal Kingdom"
author: Melody Malmberg
ISBN: 0-7868-6402-8
price: $24.95
sold: shops in Animal Kingdom and Downtown Disney

But I suppose the book could have been mis-shelved. It was supposed to be under a sign that said fiction.

 

[Peter Pirate]

OK so we have written verification...Was that book commissioned by Disney? Where are the press releases promsing the future? When did Weiss officially announce and then retract BK?

Just because something has been planned or even greenlighted doesn't make it 'ours.' It's ours when they give it to us, otherwise we can complain about every single attraction not being as "great as it should have been"...

 

[Another Voice]

Well, from ‘Since The World Began’ by Jeff Kurtti (forward by Roy Disney) and published by Hyperion (Disney’s wholly owned publishing subsidiary) –

Page 169, “Guests will embark on journeys into three major areas of the theme park, the real, the mythical, and the extinct.”

Page 170, “In the mythical wolrd of unicorns, dragons, and other magical creatures, guests will come face to face with make-believe animals from legends, fairy tales, and storybooks – all of which play an important role in the circle of life because of their powerful hold on our imagination. The creatures will come to life through Disney’s cretive storytelling.”

On page 171 the caption reads “One region of the park, planned for after Phase One, will give ‘life’ to the mythical world of unicorns, dragons, and other magical creatures. Guests will get a chance to see make-believe animals from legends, fairy tales and storybooks.”

The page feature a painting of the entire land with a European village topped by a smoldering castle (the dragon coaster), a topiary garden, the unicorn hedge maze and the ‘Fantasia’ water gardens. Three other smaller paintings show the Unicorn’s Grotto (the goal of the maze), a scene from the ‘Fantasia’ boat ride and a very detailed layout of the Unicorn Maze, complete with the title ‘Quest for the Unicorn’ on the painting.

It’s been very clear from the beginning of the project that Beastly Kingdom was one of the three cornerstones of the park’s theme, one of the core elements of the entire place. In fact the dragon coaster and the unicorn maze were supposed to be “Phase One” attractions and were announced along with the park itself. Dropping BK is a major change both in terms of the plans and for the overall structure of the park as well. It's not trivial.

To me it seems that if the company publicly announces something and features it prominently in the park’s marketing that really does set the guests’ expectations about being able to see it one of these days. The area was always promoted more than just an “idea” for the park.

 

[Peter Pirate]

OK! That's more like it...I'm glad you see my point.

 

[Another Voice]

“It's ours when they give it to us…”

Again with the “give us” thing.

Sorry my friend, this is a business and not Santa Claus. Disney has to at least meet its customer’s expectations if they hope that we will continue "giving" them our money in return. The problem with Beastly Kingdom is that too many people believed Disney and want to see it. Until something happens most of those people (rightly or wrongly) are going to perceive Animal Kingdom as being incomplete.

And all because Disney said they were giving us something more than what they delivered.

 

[Carl]

But you all are missing one very important point.
Disney keeps the parks and resorts full all year round - and, except for a very few months after 9/11, at very high prices.
Why should they feel any real urgency to build more attractions?
The more attractions, the more they have to spend, not only to build them, but also to keep them running. If people are crowding the parks almost to capacity for the reduced hours they are open, why, pray tell, should Disney open the parks longer or build new parks and attractions?

 

[YoHo]

Landbaron, You have hit what I am all about here, and why I detest fitting into now Verboten Car Models.

I have a problem with the Way Disney expands now, not what we are given. What you expect, what you have outlined in your first post is that they have a cohesive plan. MGM/Studios biggest failure is the lack of a cohesive plan. This goes here, that goes there. AK had one, but it was left unfinished. Now they can't decide what they wanted it to be.

You tread a dangerous line in your Epcot Description, by lumping single Ride Attractions in with Pavilions Horizons isn't any different from say Soarin over California, Horizons however existed amidst a cohesive and compelling theme. Clearly Epcot exists as 2 lands and any subdivison beyond that is gravy.

the Size of the Studios is I think a Blessing. Ultimatly, the only way to expand in Florida beyond 2 parks was to turn lands into parks. I have no problem with that, but Cohesiveness of Theme is a Requirment. Wouldn't the studios be better if things were segragated by theme more? Organization?

AK conversly is organized quite well. It simply is missing a major appendage. Perhaps it's just my wish to see beastly kingdom from a personal standpoint as I like that sort of thing, but AK gives me the same feeling that I get when I look at pictures of Disneyland circa July of 1955. It just isn't done and it needs to be.

Thus with AK, there is some truth to the E-Ticket will save us all concept. Yet, it also needs to be finished in terms of general theme. The Studios needs a Cohesive theme and MK needs actually a few B-D tickets.

 

[Carl]

But you all are missing one very important point.
Disney keeps the parks and resorts full all year round - and, except for a very few months after 9/11, at very high prices.
Why should they feel any real urgency to build more attractions?
The more attractions, the more they have to spend, not only to build them, but also to keep them running. If people are crowding the parks almost to capacity for the reduced hours they are open, why, pray tell, should Disney open the parks longer or build new parks and attractions?

 

[All Aboard]

Wouldn't the studios be better if things were segragated by theme more? Organization?

Yes, absolutely. The Studios (as originally conceived) failed (so to speak.) Folks didn't seem willing to spend 3 or 4 hours on the then-expanded Studio Tour. So, Disney began adding attractions, here-there-and everywhere. There is little theme to the place.

Themes is one of the reasons I like Universal Studios. First, the original "tag line" of the place was "ride the movies." They've stuck to that quite well. Each and every attraction (except Woody's Kidzone) is about a specific movie (or a demonstration about making movies.) Disney-MGM doesn't quite have that cohesive identity. Rock n Roller is the chief example. (But, I guess music is made in a type of "studio.")

And, the park is divided up into themes. New York (which got a little screwy when Twister replaced Ghostbusters), San Francisco, Amity, World Expo, etc.

And, the layout is great. You can walk in a nice circle from attraction to attraction starting with Hanna Barbera and ending with Terminator.

Disney-MGM studios has seemed to be a haphazard, constantly changing (isn't Beauty and the Beast in it's third home right now) layout.

There is also one big dead area - New York Street. The "backlot" areas of Universal Studios have the attractions built right in. The Hollywood section is a front for Terminator, same for NY - Kong and SF - Earthquake.

Unfortunately, WDW cannot do much about the layout. And, if they are going to expand, they may have to rip out NY Street or Residential Lane.

 

[YoHo]

Well, As far as Rock and Rollercoaster Goes, I'm willing to accept themes from Radio, Music and T.V., but I want them to be devided up rationally and Logically which they are not. they currently are wherever they might fit.