Originally Posted By Expo_Seeker40 OH NOZ, NOT ANOTHER DOOMZ AND GLOOMZ TOPIC! If all goes planned, I can expect to find myself and some family spending a night or two at the wilderness lodge in early december, soaking up the christmas decor before all hell breaks loose by christmas break with the crowds....and yet something has me wondering about another hotel on bay lake... it's not so much the bay lake tower...but has the contemporary hotel lost itself...the addition of the convention center years ago...the redone parking lot...the oh too visible garbage dumps and storage bins from the monorail and garden wing...and the overall tired exterior with yellow and white paint. Yet inside, one will find a very nice lobby, new rooms, the wave, and great earth toned carpeting that looks semi 1971 and compliments the mary blair mural...yet a fantasia gift shop is slammed on top of it and monorail station carpeting from the 90s...and chef mickeys that has nothing to do with the grand canyon. Unlike the Poly or Golf Resort which in my opinion have aged gracefully with some refurbs..the Contemporary is like someone, who got two bad face lifts over a span of 15 years and now has duck lips and partly closed eyes.
Originally Posted By Manfried It also has some major structural issues. Frankly it needs to be closed and imploded in my opinion. Then a really innovative architect needs to be hire to rethink what should be the iconic hotel for WDW.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper I was never a fan of the Contemporary, in all honesty until I stayed in the Presidential suite one time(long story). The view was spectacular. But still for a normal guest it's just not that appealing, IMO. Give me the Poly or Wilderness Lodge over it any day.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper I was never a fan of the Contemporary, in all honesty until I stayed in the Presidential suite one time(long story). The view was spectacular. But still for a normal guest it's just not that appealing, IMO. Give me the Poly or Wilderness Lodge over it any day.
Originally Posted By jmuboy I think the boutique hotel route the hotel took on in the last few years is fine. Its a hotel that you love or hate. Its not over flowing with theme touches like many Disney Hotels (and thats a result of the theme I think).
Originally Posted By -em Don't get me started... Despite calling it home for the last few years its not. I have no love for the place- Yes its showing its years and has not aged well- You don't ask if its going to leak you ask where cause it seems to be daily there is a leak somewhere.. It's become a real hodge podge of a theme throughout etc etc -em
Originally Posted By Christi22222 >>the Contemporary is like someone, who got two bad face lifts over a span of 15 years and now has duck lips and partly closed eyes.<< Regardless of how you feel about the hotel, this line is classic! Hah! I agree with everything said in the OP. Some elements I really love and the rest doesn't work. And that seems a shame. But the views and location are awesome, and the monorail whoosh is still a fun bit of kinetic energy that you get nowhere else except the parks.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer Yep, it's totally lost it's charm and spirit from what it was supposed to be. It's very bland right now, feels like any other hotel. The only remarkable thing about it, is that the A-Frame is still there... ...only wedged between a convention center and boring building that belongs on Miami Beach, not Bay Lake. Give me the Poly, or even the stuffy Grand Floridian ANYDAY.
Originally Posted By leemac I'm not sure that the Contemporary ever found itself. It has never had an interior that I thought worked. The worst was the terrible teal/purple combo of the '90s. I think it ultimately failed in the same way that Tomorrowlands do - it just couldn't find a look that worked and would last for years. I should caveat the following by saying that I'm not a fan of the Contemporary as an architectural ediface. Welton Becket and Associates were the firm responsible and they have left behind an incredibly cold, bulky and cumbersome white elephant. Architecturally it only seems to exist to have the monorail pass through it - there is no subtlety or architectural flourishes - it is a plain as the nose on your face. My favorite comment about it came from Playboy magazine where a journalist called it a "pop-up toaster". It is an empty ediface - all concrete which is incredibly hard for interior designers to work with. Another caveat - I am a fan of post-Modern architecture and so I do like the Convention Center. It was designed by Gwathmey Siegel & Associates and was supposed to be the complete opposite of the A-frame - warmer, more abstract. It is an airy environment - unusual for convention centers that tend to be dark with low ceilings. I don't get the hate for the Bay Lake Tower either - granted it isn't the most spectacular architectural hotel on property but when you are trying to build something close to the MK and next to the concrete monolith that is the Contemporary you need something understated and simple. The expanse of glass is in stark contrast to the dull grey monotony of the concrete Contemporary.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>I should caveat the following by saying that I'm not a fan of the Contemporary as an architectural ediface. Welton Becket and Associates were the firm responsible and they have left behind an incredibly cold, bulky and cumbersome white elephant. Architecturally it only seems to exist to have the monorail pass through it - there is no subtlety or architectural flourishes <<< That, I agree with. I honestly think it's famous for being famous. It's WDW's "first" Hotel. Don't know why the Poly doesn't get the honor...
Originally Posted By disneydad109 it's still the contemporary,it's just contemporary to 1985. Cue the theme from the Carousel of progress , please !
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I am with Lee- I never cared for the Contemporary - and before buying into DVC usually stayed at Poly and a few times at GF. Always found it cold- - also I think Bay Lake Tower superior to looks than Contemporary and maybe does contribute to it looking even more dated. I like most people I guess like the monorail pass thru idea- it was especially cool for 1971 - and I still like it.. I always thought the wings were plain ugly- reminding me of the old motels on 192 decades ago.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 I have never stayed in the tower but we stayed in the garden wing one time and found the room to be spacious and we had a great view of the water bridge between Bay Lake and Seven Seas Lagoon. Would love to have a tower room overlooking the MK sometime and sit, have a drink and watch the fireworks. I think the Contemporary has gotten worse over the years because there hasnt been a single cohesive design decision in the place and the Concourse level has been jammed with shops, food loctions and every other sort of thing that just makes it look cluttered.
Originally Posted By brotherdave Count me as one who likes the overall exterior look of the Contemporary. To me it is as much a symbol of WDW as is Cinderella's Castle, Spaceship Earth, and the Monorail. It is certainly a unique looking structure and will most likely never be reproduced at any other Disney property. Yes, it is somewhat dated, but that is where its "charm" is - forever "stuck" as a representation of the 1970s. Unlike other themed hotels that try to evoke another time or place, the Contemporary IS its theme - "contemporary" 1970s urban-America. Now, with WDW's 40th anniversary approaching, many of us are longing for the "simpler" times of Walt Disney World's early years of the 1970s with only one theme park and the resorts were part of that package. Well, the Contemporary IS part of that period and aside from it's neighboring additions (and concerning BLT, less appealing) of recent years, it's overall A-Frame structure has remained as a brilliant reminder of WDW's "simpler" days as the "Vacation Kingdom of the World". The monorail passing through it makes it even more iconic and is a wonderful thrill for passengers and passerby's alike. Even today, when the monorail passes through the structure, most people, young and old alike, still get excited. Afterall, there is not other hotel in the world that has this wonderfully unique feature. Plus, it offers one of the best views of the MK and is a perfect background to complement Tomorrowland. For its day, it truly was an architectual marvel and I hope it will always remain a part of WDW.
Originally Posted By bobbelee9 I'm a Poly gal, into the laid back. My DH thinks the Contemp looks like a prison when viewed from the monorail stop. But the Contemp stands out, it's very recognizable. To me it's impressive and I think BLT fits right in with it. I just don't want to stay there.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>> But the Contemp stands out, it's very recognizable.<<< Only thing really "disney" about it.
Originally Posted By ttalovebug ^Personally, I like the fact that the architecture, lobby, and other aspects of the Contemp don't scream "disney". That's ruined, of course, by the hideous gift shop in the concourse. IMO, I think it's a really cool place with an identity crisis. Is it modern, a retro-view of modern, or a Disney hotel?
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Personally, I like the fact that the architecture, lobby, and other aspects of the Contemp don't scream "disney". That's ruined, of course, by the hideous gift shop in the concourse.>> There's a big difference between being inherently Disney and "screaming" Disney though. Look at the Polynesian. The theming, detail, and just overall wonderful ambiance is wholely Disney, and Disney quality, and that feeling is carried on throughout. The lobbies of the Contemporary are beautiful, and evoke the same feeling of the Ploy's. However, it's destroyed by the concourses. Also, the pool area is lazy, and is something you can find at any hotel. So yes, I would have to agree that it is a potentially great hotel ruined by an identity crisis.
