Disney Theme Parks: Today vs. Yesterday

[DVC-Landbaron]

And I never take a contrary position for the sake of a contrary position. Really, I don't - so get that idea out of your head Baron.

Mr. Kidds!!

I claimed you stir the pot. I never mentioned contrary positions!! I think you may have me confused with another poster... or perhaps another board!!

 

[DancingBear]

Originally posted by DVC-Landbaron
I mean do you call Pop Century “Disney Theming”? I don’t. And to varying degrees ALL the resorts built under Ei$ner’s careful reign fall into the same category. NONE were built with true “Disney Theming”.

I'm sure I've missed an entire history of threads on this point, but what is the Disney theming about the Contemporary? To me, it was on the cutting edge of contemporary architecture of the time. That's what the Swan and Dolphin are to me.

What is the Disney theming about the Poly? Evoking the feeling of an exotic location. Fort Wilderness? Evoking a simpler time and place. Boardwalk, Coronado Springs, Port Orleans French Quarter all fill that bill to me.

Oh, and what was the Disney theming of the Golf Resort? Uhhh, well.....

What happened to the master plan for the property? Or if they hated that one, how about doing another of your own, with some sort of cohesive thought for the property, and an eye toward future growth. How about laying out a plan that actually takes the guest’s comfort, driving, transportation and architectural ambience into account?

If you have had any exposure to land use planning, you know that development on the ground tends to follow long-term master plans only in the most general sense. It's a framework for future development, not a blueprint. I'm certain there are revised master plans and five-year plans and such within the company. It's inconceivable to me that there would not be.

I don't see the development of the property being as higgledy-piggeldy as you do. It's gone through some fits and starts, yes, but they seem to be more of continuing adjustments to construction schedules for cost control reasons, rather than indicating a lack of master planning.

He [Eisner] is very good at exchanging the short term profit for the long term interest. He’s very good at mortgaging the future to meet the demands of the present. He’s a master at beating his next quarter.

I don't understand how undertaking large long-term capital projects reflects short-term return thinking. Those aren't the types of earnings management efforts that most people talk about when they complain about the short-term outlook of the capital markets.

[Regarding the Swan and Dolphin] Within the sight lines of EPCOT!?!?! Behind the Eiffel Tower, an upside-down cartoon looking fish! What’d ya thinkin’!?!?!

I don't ever remember seeing the Swan and Dolphin from within Epcot. Not that you can't---I just don't think it's has the jarring effect on most people that it has on you. After all, I can see much uglier Future World buildings from World Showcase anyway.

 

[EUROPA]

Wait I'm confused. Are these attractions E-Ticket....Muppets, Honey I shrunk the Audience ... It's Tough to be a Bug? Was the Lion King show in MK a E-Ticket ?

 

[DancingBear]

Interesting question, Europa. I'd say Muppets and It's Tough to be a Bug were E-tickets, but the Lion King show in MK, which I really enjoyed, was a C or D ticket. But, I think it's really a lot of speculation. For instance, look at the old E-ticket on this page:

http://www.etixland.com/tix/tix.htm

Monorail to hotel and back?
Tiki Birds?
Country Bears?
Small World?

My, things do change.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Originally posted by DancingBear
Interesting question, Europa..........................

Monorail to hotel and back?
Tiki Birds?
Country Bears?
Small World?

My, things do change.

Wow, they sure do change. I think "E-Ticket" as most use/perceive it today is much different than what this shows it was in the past. I never would have thought that any of those things you just listed, or any of the things Europa asked about, should be considered E-tickets. Wow. Ok, now I really do want an "older timers" perspective on E-Ticket. Baron - your thoughts on these items as E-Tickets?

Personally, I view E-Tickets as kind of like the anchor stores in the mall. The biggest rides with the largest scope in each of the parks/lands designed to really draw guests. Rides that were the result of big investment as well as great imagineering. That is the connotation I think E-Ticket has today....................but I guess I could be wrong in how I view that.

 

[mitros]

Yay! another thread gone ballistic on the disboards. I wish I could sell tickets to these things. {apologies to those of you who don't like smiley faces. }

 

[hopemax]

And you don't think that the Country Bears, Monorail, Tiki Room or Small World required big investment and great imagineering? I remember when Return of the Jedi came out, the wonder that was associated with the Jabba the Hut animatronic. And that was one creature built 20 years after the Tiki Room, 10 years after the Country Bears and those were entire casts.

Also, remember that the first upside-down steel coaster wasn't built until 1975 (Corkscrew at Knott's Berry Farm). Major parks like Cedar Point, only had a couple woodies, and a couple mad mice. The industry wasn't as roller coaster dominated as it is today, and certainly not the hyper coasters that Bob O loves so much.

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by Testtrack321
Quick question DVC, what about AKL? Is that up to the traditional "Disney Themeing" that Poly had?

See, to me this question kind of points out the problem. Everybody has their own subjective, idiosyncratic opinions. Like the resorts. We've talked about this so much on here. I know that my opinion and Land Baron's have a lot of overlap. But it isn't 100%. I would say that there have been a few resorts that were up to Disney theming since the Polly, cont., and Ft. Wilderness. At WDW, there are two, the Wilderness Lodge, and the Animal Kingdom Lodge (it would have been better if they kept the original name, Safari Lodge, and if they had some unique transportation to AK park, but it still meets the requirements for me). I go back and forth on Grand Floridian, but ultimately, it doesn't measure up to me. The only other ones in the world are Grand Californian, Disneyland Paris Hotel, and to some extent Mira Costa. This isn't based on my personal opinion and like/dislike or how pretty I think they are or how comfortable the beds are or whatever. It is based on the basic concept that the first resorts at WDW were tied to the Magic Kingdom park, extending the theme of the lands so that you could stay in that land. The Polly was the only one you could see from Adventureland, and it extended the Adventureland theme. The Contemporary was the only resort that you could see from Tomorrowland, and that view with the monorail going right through it fit right in. It was Tomorrowland. Ft. Wilderness was the extension of Frontierland, and Wilderness Lodge is the spiritual extension of Ft. Wilderness, thereby fitting the criteria. People could make arguments for Grand Floridian being victorian like Main Street, or as an extension of Fantasyland, but it doesn't really deliver; instead it comes across as a Flagler-ized copy of the hotel del coranado, that looks like a suburban apartment complex. The only other resort that ties in with the theme of its park is the Animal Kingdom Lodge. The Epcot area hotels have nothing to do with Epcot, and the monstrous Swan and Dolphin take away from Epcot, which never should have been allowed. There really is no excuse for the values. I mean, I'm glad that more people can afford to stay on property and all that, and I can recognize the business side that you had to differentiate the values from the deluxes if you were going to have values, but I just wouldn't have done them in the first place. The moderates either, really, unless they were themed to extend the water parks or something. I really love the boardwalk, it could have been adjacent to downtown disney maybe and been ok. The vacation club resort and the golf resort don't do it for me. But I understand why the Golf resort was made - made not to be "campy" like the others and to appeal to adults who wanted the "other" type of Disney vacation - golf, etc. The Grand Californian fits in perfectly with that area of the Cal. Adv. park (and, fwiw, that is the only area of that park I wouldn't bull doze, but that is a different dead horse). The Disneyland Paris hotel is the fantasyland/main street hotel that the grand floridian isn't. Mira Costa fits seamlessly in that area of the Disneysea; the only thing is, it feels more like Disneysea is fitting to Mira Costa than Mira Costa is to Disneysea, since there is little in the Med. Harbor area besides the Mira Costa and the restaurants, shops. All of those resorts, WL, GC, AKL, MC are up to the QUALITY level of disney theming to me, and are the most immersive sort of experiences and deliver what they are supposed to.

So that's my opinion, but it is just my opinion, and that brings me back to the problem, which is mistaking opinions for reality, that you have your own private disney world that should be based on meeting the preferences of you and your family, rather than on the reality of meeting those other million guests. I mean I've read on here that All star movies is the only resort themed to disney standards because it has those giant disney characters. I think that's nuts, but somebody loves those places, and my opinion isn't any more right than their's, and saying that they just don't understand Disney or that they just want snow globes, blah blah blah, or that they are wrong, stupid, or falsifying liars, or they are just to new, doesn't make my opinions any more right. I think Dixie Landings is a nightmare, for some folks it is heaven on earth. There are people who just don't "GET" the polly or Cont. or Ft. Wilderness, they think they are horrible. There are some that think the Grand Floridian actually is "Luxurious." Etc. Heck, I think they are all campy in one way or another, some folks take them serious. We have all formed our impressions of what "Disney" is, what "Disney World" is, etc. and they aren't the same, and no one of us is correct. It is a place were MILLIONS of people go through every year, and THOUSANDS of people work and make it what it is. It is no single thing. It's just like that California Grill deck. Some folks have this view of it as this place that they have watched fireworks at and should be allowed to, others think it is part of the restaurant and would rather it be that way. We have different points of view on what the reality is there, and there really is no TRUTH, there is no RIGHT, it is all opinion and points of view. Mine overlaps with Land Baron's in a lot of ways, more than it does with anyone else's here probably, but it is so different from his in other ways. That is probably because we both have strong impressions and opinions about it. But neither one is right or wrong, whether we agree or not. We aren't talking about things that we can quantify, measure, weigh or scale. We are talking about impressionsitic things that we often don't even agree upon the operational definitions of.

 

[DancingBear]

I certainly remember how big of an attraction Country Bears was when it opened. For me, Country Bears for its time is comparable to Muppets for its time. The use of 3-D, a multitude of effects built into the theater, and live performers combined into a very entertaining and innovative show.

 

[DisneyKidds]

And you don't think that the Country Bears, Monorail, Tiki Room or Small World required big investment and great imagineering?

Allow me to clarify.......................and thanks for making me do so...............

I think these represent wonderful marvels of imagineering. That is why I put it together with big investment. I guess I need to put "big" investment in context, and relate it to scope. Let's leave the monorail out as that was a HUGE investment. I guess I have a hard time considering a transportation mode, no matter how great, an attraction. Did you really need a ticket to ride the monorail in the past? Hey, you can ride it for free now, so I guess we can't say post-Walt-era management never gave anything away . Moving along..............Indeed, I'm sure the other attractions you mention required considerable investment. However, the scope of those attractions was much smaller than something like Pirates. Pirates took the same complex animatronics, multipled them by ten, and put them in a moving, living story. The other attractions only (an that is no insignificant only) incorporated them in to an incredibly cute show. See the difference in scope? Now that difference in scope surely required quite a step up in the already considerable expense. That is "big".

Make more sense?

 

[DisneyKidds]

It is based on the basic concept that the first resorts at WDW were tied to the Magic Kingdom park, extending the theme of the lands so that you could stay in that land. The Polly was the only one you could see from Adventureland, and it extended the Adventureland theme. The Contemporary was the only resort that you could see from Tomorrowland, and that view with the monorail going right through it fit right in. It was Tomorrowland. Ft. Wilderness was the extension of Frontierland

You know I never really connected all of that in such a concrete way until now. Thanks. Of course it makes me wonder how the Venetian (one of the 'supposed to be', real WDW hotels directly from "Walt's Plan") was supposed to fit in? Was that to be the Main Street/Fantasyland connection?.......................but that wouldn't seem to be a good fit. Or...............does the fact that even Walt had designs for a non-MK-tied resorts provide some evidence that not all future WDW resorts had to be tied to a park the way that the Poly and CR were? Not trying to make oo prove a point here, or assuming whatever I need to to feel better about a position , just thinking out loud and genuinely wondering.

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

I always considered "E-ticket" to mean the Disney park showpieces... the creations which best represented what was meant by "Disney Magic," top-to-bottom, end-to-end.

The Tiki Room was an almost incomprehensible acheivement of innovative engineering, when it was created, in the service of putting on a show families could generally enjoy together.

Neither the technology nor the show itself have weathered the intervening decades nearly well enough to be considered examples of Disney's greatest efforts, at this point... which makes it difficult to praise the Tiki Room without seeming to be idly throwing roses at Walt's Frozen Feet; but yeah, the Tiki Room kicked several kinds of *** when it was new, different, and a generation or two more relevant (in general, I felt the Iago/Zazu overlay was a half-hearted makeover that destroyed some of the classic, now campy appeal of the original show, without creating a corresponding increase in appeal-to-today's-guests terms).

I had a personal dislike, at the time, for the Country music nature of the Jamboree... and we _always_ had to see it because it was my grandfather's favorite, and in the summers of the 1970's, we _always_ seemed to have to wait for more than an hour to see it (I swear I'm not making that up... that many people really did want to see the Bears), and at that point, the trees in Frontierland weren't generally that much taller than my six-year-old frame at the time... so it was _hot_ waiting, too. The Jamboree never did it for me personally, but it sure seemed to do it for a lot of other folks, in and out of my travelling parties, in those days.

I agree that "E ticket" has largely come to mean "attraction with longest lines," (if they close one or two more registers per shift, Pecos Bill's and Cosmic Ray's could qualify for FastPass soon) without regard for the technical or creative achievements represented by the attractions... but I believe that's pretty much a backwards way of looking at things, when it comes to planning and building your brand, parks, and individual attractions.

 

[hopemax]

I think you're primarily reacting to "how different attractions age (shows vs. ride-throughs)." My dad's favorite story about DL is how in the late 60's they went for the first time and ladies were pulling out their rain bonnets, as they exited the Tiki Room because they didn't realize that the rain storm was part of the "show." I don't think that in the bulk 1970's people were exiting Country Bears and Tiki Room, and saying "oh, what a cute show." No more so, than people exit Festival of the Lion King say, "oh,what a cute show," as if it was the Playhouse Disney show.

Small World, suffers from it's song. Change the song to Jingle Bells, decorate it for Christmas and it requires Fastpass.

 

[d-r]

I think you are confusing the Disneyland monorail, part of Tomorrowland, with the WDW monorail, DisneyKidds. The Disneyland Monorail went in during the frist big expansion of Disneyland (59?) along with the subs and the matterhorn, and was a big deal, it was an e-ticket. It also made Tomorrowland a cool view of kinetic energy, with the subs down below, the autopia on ground level, the people mover above, the monorail above that, and the sky buckets above that. When I look at the old videos it always seems to me that part of the attraction was looking at the other attractions, if that makes sense. This was a major expansion, I'm not sure what you would consider e-tickets before these if monorail wasn't one!

The Enchanted Tikki Room was a big deal, the first audioanimatronics, and it was certainly an e-ticket. I'm not sure what you mean by "scope," exactly, but doing those from scratch had to be a pretty big deal.

Small World was a big deal when it went in, too, it was from the World's Fair. It reminds me of POTC in some ways.

Country Bears, the way I understand it, was never as popular in Disneyland as it is in Florida. I don't know if that is true or not. It was put in after Walt's death; Marc Davis had been working on the plans for it while Walt was alive, but it was for the mineral springs ski resort project originally.

Walt loved trains, Walt loved bears.

Edited to add - I'm not sure when they did away with the tickets at Disneyland, but I don't think it was too long after the one that is shown on that site was used - that one has to be from after 1977.

 

[DisneyKidds]

WFH/Hope - I agree that the Enchanted Tiki Room was an incredible attraction. I love it. I agree the whole Yago/Zazu thing didn't do anything but take away from a classic, but we still see the show every trip. So I'm not trying to knock things like the Birds or the Bears. However, as incredible as the approach, innovation, and technology was at the time I think the point about how they have aged is somewhat relevant. I consider them classics, but do many consider them classics in the sense of Pirates? You see, Pirates had something more (maybe more than just grander scope) that took it to a different level. I like this description of an E-Ticket....................

Disney park showpieces... the creations which best represented what was meant by "Disney Magic," top-to-bottom, end-to-end.

............I guess I just think something that stands the test of time better is a more shining example than the shining examples that the Tiki Room and Country Bears are.

As for lines....................isn't there a reason for those long lines? I know a lot of people feel there are tons of stupid, thrill hungry consumers out there that just don't "get it", but I don't discount them all so easily.

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Of course it makes me wonder how the Venetian (one of the 'supposed to be', real WDW hotels directly from "Walt's Plan") was supposed to fit in?

Ah, but they never built it Don't confuse the cutting room floor with the theater screen

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

Thanks. Of course it makes me wonder how the Venetian (one of the 'supposed to be' real WDW hotels directly from "Walt's Plan") was supposed to fit in?

As I understood it, the Persian was to have built farther along down the road that takes you to the Contemporary then continues around Space Mountain and was an Arabian Knights inspired backdrop for Fantasyland.

I'm not sure I've heard anything about a direct MK land correlate for the Venetian, either, come to think of it.

 

[hopemax]

From Yesterland

Tickets were phased out in the late 1970's and early 1980's. First, Magic Kingdom Club members could buy unlimited passports. Then the option was extended to other guests.

Tickets were eliminated in June 1982, when all-inclusive passports became the only form of Disneyland admission.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I think you are confusing the Disneyland monorail, part of Tomorrowland, with the WDW monorail, DisneyKidds.

That would make more sense. Thanks. I guess I should have actually clicked on the link .

 

[DisneyKidds]

Originally posted by d-r
Ah, but they never built it .

Hmmmmm.................I usually get the impression that some folks think it was a bad thing that the resort was never built, that the 'post-Walt-era-management-that-didn't-do-what-they-should-have' abandoned Philosophy and messed up the resort system by not following thru. Surely your not suggesting **gasp** that the Philosophy was protected by not doing something that Walt might have thought of/wanted .

WFH - thanks for the input on the Persian - that would have been a good fit.