Disney Theme Parks: Today vs. Yesterday

[DancingBear]

D-R, great post above. Enjoyed your explanation of which resorts are Disney and which are not---I had heard the Poly/Contemp/Fort Wilderness relationship to MK before, but I don't have any familiarity with CA, Paris or Japan resorts you mentioned. As I said, the concept of Disneyness of the resorts means something different to me, and I put more of the new hotels on the list than you do. I'm not a fan of the All-Stars or Pop Century, but as you said, some folks love the All-Stars, and their opinion is entitled to some respect. (Also, Disney did hire another well-respected architecture house to design them, which I think deserves some consideration).

I would hope the good Baron will be able to internalize your thoughts on everyone's varying opinions, and thereby relieve his frustration (and lower his blood pressure) somewhat. I enjoy the various points of view expressed here. I've learned a great deal, and have been given some good points to chew over from you, the Baron and others. I hope I contribute something of value to the discussion from time to time.

On your most recent post, your description of the motion in Disneyland's Tomorrowland of the past reminded me of the feeling I got last December riding the boat from the Poly to MK. Seven Seas Lagoon was full of bustle, with the watermice, the ferry, the boat from Fort Wilderness et. al., together with the view of both the MK and resort monorails. What a feeling of energy and excitement!

Also on that post, I can testify to waiting in long lines in both FL and CA for Country Bears, in the early years.

Hopemax, I agree that I'm talking about being struck by the difference in how attractions age. What does that mean about what is an E-ticket now? Can we know which of the newer attractions will hold up? Interesting question. For example, I'd guess that the Tower of Terror will hold up longer than Rock 'N Roller Coaster, because the story and effects are stronger, even though Tower of Terror is grouped in with the thrill rides. Tower of Terror to me is like Splash Mountain in that respect. Folks stand outside and watch the big drop/splash, but the experience is much more than that aspect of the ride.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I hope I contribute something of value to the discussion from time to time.

I've enjoyed your input, and am glad you are aboard. Of course, we are more like-minded on some things so it isn't surprising. You have made an impact though. Baron and I were talking and one of his sources of frustration is that I can agree with him on so many points, yet always rally with the likes or Scoop, crusader, and more recently you! I love it when someone else gets under the good Baron's skin . We gotta keep him honest you know .

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by DancingBear
For example, I'd guess that the Tower of Terror will hold up longer than Rock 'N Roller Coaster, because the story and effects are stronger, even though Tower of Terror is grouped in with the thrill rides. Tower of Terror to me is like Splash Mountain in that respect. Folks stand outside and watch the big drop/splash, but the experience is much more than that aspect of the ride.

...heck depending on who you talk to RNRC was a dud from the start. Sure it is exciting for the crowd whose biggest thrill to that point was Space Mt but compared to other Coasters and add in a very "weak" theme RNRC is not in the league with other Disney Attractions or even other non-themed Coasters.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Just a little tidying up...........................

I'm not sure what you mean by "scope," exactly, but doing those from scratch had to be a pretty big deal.

Indeed, the accomplishment was a big deal, but I hoped this would give you a sense of what I meant by scope............

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.

Pirates was "all that, and a bag of chips" if you will. Same great complexity of Show, just taken to another level.

Agreed, Hope............................

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."

...................'cute' may not have been the best choice of words. Then again, how do most view it now? I see them now as 'cute', even though they once 'wowed' me. On the other hand some things like Pirates, Space Mnt, Splash, ToT will, IMHO, always be 'wow' as they seem to take the things Disney 'stuff' that made the Tiki Birds and Country Bears 'wow' at one time, and adds that something more. I'm probably doing a bad job of explaining.............but that ain't gonna stop me .

Interesting thought I had. This 'what makes an E-Ticket' discussion may be one where a confluence of long, medium, and short perspectives may actually get us to the best answer. What do you thing long-term-perspectivers?

 

[Planogirl]

I'm surprised that no one has brought up The Haunted Mansion. I believe that it's definitely in the same league as Pirates but may be even better. But then ghosts and pirates really don't change and need modernizing.

A ride that contradicts a lot of the analyses is Peter Pan in my opinion. This one is actually quite simple and nowhere near the level of a Pirates or HM but I bet that it packs in the riders just as well as the fancier rides. I think that it proves that a well-designed attraction doesn't HAVE to be a technological marvel and that old rides don't necessarily HAVE to be bulldozed for the latest and greatest whatever. Peter Pan is full of "show" and somehow the public keeps on recognizing that.

 

[crusader]

Hopefully Disney will always retain its most popular classics.

When I saw that Disneyland E-ticket it appeared to be designating two of the most innovative attractions from each land, which not surprisingly also happened to be the biggest crowd pleasers.

My guess is that they had to categorize what was offered somehow and given there weren't an equal number of attractions to segregate in this manner, they wound up incorporated certain venues of a lesser degree.

 

[d-r]

DisneyKidds, I was *mostly* just kidding about the Venetian - I am not sure how it would have fit in. There was the Asian, too, to be where the Grand Floridian is, I guess it would tie to Adventureland. So it could be that there would have been more than one place per land, I guess. I'm not sure how any of it would have fit in with Walt's model of Epcot, for that matter. Also, I understood what you were saying about Pirates, but what I was trying to say about "scope" was that Pirates was built on the shoulders of the Enchanted Tiki Room, It's a Small World, Mr. Lincoln. So there was a lot of "scope" in the Tiki Room, even if the final product doesn't seem as complex as Pirates, if that makes sense - the basic process of the movements being recorded on those record looking things that was developed in the Tiki Room made Pirates possible. If that makes sense.

Glad you are here, Dancing Bear - most everyone likes reading others opinions, even if they do disagree sometimes.