Originally Posted By Nemo88 This question is for Bean, Bean,is there any chance King Tritons Carousel will receive a 'plussing/remodel' before TSM opens next summer? it looks so bad next to the new TSM buildings.
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL Here's hoping!!!! I love the marine animals as carousel "horses" but the structure it is in, well, very under-whelming.
Originally Posted By TP2000 Paradise Pier is some of the ugliest, cheapest examples of what a failure DCA was on opening day. They should bulldoze that corny carousel with the cement slab foundation, apartment stucco walls, and metal railing queue and start all over again. Many people defended it all in 2001 and tried to pretend there was legitimate detail and care put into things, but some of us knew right from Opening Day that DCA was a cheap, ugly, charmless place. How funny that only six years later EVERYONE, even DCA's defenders from 2001, are now chomping at the bit for "plussing" and rebuilding of the original park and it's attractions. Not meaning to pick on you personally Nemo88, honestly, but the thought just couldn't remain unsaid for me. "DCA is great! It just needs better marketing/weather/ticketing/passholders/electricalparade/bugsland/towerofterror/blast/aladdin/placemaking...." ;-)
Originally Posted By Nemo88 TP2000,people who LOVE disneyland want DL to be plussed as well,it proves nothing.We all enjoy improvements to the parks no matter how much we like/love/enjoy the park,even holier than thou Disneyland gets its fans excited when its areas are plussed.Doesnt mean Disneyland was lacking etc/same goes for DCA. now can we move on and look to the future? these "DCA sucks" posts started getting old like 3 years ago man.
Originally Posted By lesmisfan im kinda hoping, although i doubt it will happen that seeing that we are getting a victorian theme, i think a mary poppins carousel would be awesome, or if not, they can keep the little mermaind scenes, add music from the mermaid and add some pictures where the upper mirrors are, just like the pics in the carousel at disneyland.
Originally Posted By oc_dean You know ... the carriages themselves are nice. I can see some sentiment for this carousel .. but come on! It is one of the most rinky-dinky smallest carousels ever built for a full scale theme park?! Even the malls around So Cal have larger carousels! And here's a REAL carousel incase anyone's interested ..... <a href="http://www.tokyodisneyresort.co.jp/tds/english/7port/arabian/atrc_caravan.html" target="_blank">http://www.tokyodisneyresort.c o.jp/tds/english/7port/arabian/atrc_caravan.html</a>
Originally Posted By labretbear I like Triton's Carousel. The fanciful California sea critters; the calliope interpretations of California and beach pop songs; the fact that most of the time I ride it I end up getting a double ride thru. But damn the structure it sits in is le cheap. I get the feeling that if I really wanted to I could punch my fist through the .99ç stucco...
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>people who LOVE disneyland want DL to be plussed as well,it proves nothing.We all enjoy improvements to the parks no matter how much we like/love/enjoy the park,even holier than thou Disneyland gets its fans excited when its areas are plussed.Doesnt mean Disneyland was lacking etc/same goes for DCA.<< I'm still amazed Improvements to DL vs. Improvements to DCA can be compared as the same ... All in the same breath. Disneyland did not have inherent design problems from the get-go. DCA did. This just goes back to those who have been arguing the same old "I like DCA, DCA is fine" camp line that has been going on with this board .. ever since I began posting in May 2000. >> these "DCA sucks" posts started getting old like 3 years ago man.<< And these discussions that improvements to DCA vs. DL is old too! As it's apples and oranges.
Originally Posted By oc_dean OH ... Hans .... surely you're joking around. I think this debate has stretched far enough about the history of DCA .. and how it VASTLY differs from the manner of DL history.
Originally Posted By LuLu >>Disneyland did not have inherent design problems from the get-go.<< Wasn't there a water fountain and/or bathroom shortage when DL opened? Can you imagine if there had been discussion boards back then? ;-)
Originally Posted By dshyates I will be happy if they remove the stripped canvas tent and enclose it with a very ornate victorian "crystal" enclosure similar to the end of Wolfgang's old place.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I think this debate has stretched far enough about the history of DCA ... and how it VASTLY differs from the manner of DL history." You are exaggerating. It is not VASTLY different. Sorry, but plussing is plussing. Please explain how what is being proposed for Paradise Pier is so different from the Tomorrowland and Fantasyland remodeling projects that happened at DL. This kind of thing is not necessarily unprecedented. "Wasn't there a water fountain and/or bathroom shortage when DL opened? Can you imagine if there had been discussion boards back then?" I believe there was a water fountain shortage on opening day. Yeah, can you imagine the griping had there been these kinds of forums in the 50's?
Originally Posted By TP2000 Hans, it's different because Walt was creating an industry out of thin air. It would be like comparing/contrasting the Lusitania to the Queen Mary 2. The Lusitania didn't have air conditioning or stabilizers or a day spa, because those things hadn't been invented yet when the Lusitania opened to customers. The Queen Mary 2 had all those things because they had all been invented and included on ocean liners by the time the QM2 debuted. And yet, both ships are owned by Cunard. Now imagine if Cunard had built the QM2 without those luxuries and Cundard fans and execs had used the excuse "Well, remember when we launched the Lusitania and we didn't have any of that stuff either. Some of the great Cunard ships of the past have debuted with no air conditioning and no day spa." When DCA opened in 2001 Disney was not working through a learning curve on how to design, build and open a succesful theme park. They already had that in the bag. The Magic Kingdom opened in 1971 with gorgeous detail and a thoughtful design ready for decades of growth. Epcot in '82 was fabulously decadent. Disneyland Paris in '92 was gorgeous and lushly detailed. Animal Kingdom in '98 broke the mold on animal parks and yet was typical Disney brilliance. DisneySea opened in 2001 and is one of the most stunning parks I've ever visited. And then there's DCA. Disney wasn't new to the theme park business in 2001, so why did they make so many dumb mistakes with DCA? Why does King Triton's Carousel look so ugly and why is it surrounded by construction materials suited for a cheap storage rental unit in an industrial park? The carousel facility they built in Disneyland's Fantasyland remake in 1982 is gorgeous, so they had the skills and experience in how to build a nice carousel in 2001. So why did DCA's carousel turn out so cheap and ugly? The answer? They cheaped out on DCA and tried to get away with lesser quality than they had been building in the previous four decades. Cunard would be grilled endlessly if they built the Lusitania today, just as Disney was grilled by building DCA like they did in '01. It's just very funny that the same voices who tried to convince us that DCA was really very nice and would be a very succesful theme park once the nerds on the Internet quieted down have now changed their tune. It took six years, but those DCA fans from 2001 have finally admitted that the emporer has no clothes and DCA needs to be fixed. And that is quite simply hilarious. I'm laughing hysterically at it all while I watch it play out on my computer screen. ;-)
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Hans, it's different because Walt was creating an industry out of thin air." Yep, it's different because it's DL. The same ol' double standard.
Originally Posted By rocket jet They had the right idea with the carousel having marine animals instead of horses, but other than that the carousel isn't too appealing. They should've given the carousel a highly detailed Victorian canopy with some aquatic influences; similar in concept to what the carousel at TokyoDisneySea has.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Hans, it's different because Walt was creating an industry out of thin air. " No, he wasn't. That's not true. Perhaps you should actually read up on the history of these sorts of places. "When DCA opened in 2001 Disney was not working through a learning curve on how to design, build and open a succesful theme park. They already had that in the bag." This is also a ridiculous comparison. Every park is different, is built with different ideas, and different goals. Your comment would be akin to saying "Hollywood has been making movies for 100 years, so they should know how to make a film exactly right so it is perfect by now." That's not how it works. "The Magic Kingdom opened in 1971 with gorgeous detail and a thoughtful design ready for decades of growth." Well, actually, no. Fantasyland, for instance, is blocked in, and really has no room for growth. "It's just very funny that the same voices who tried to convince us that DCA was really very nice and would be a very succesful theme park once the nerds on the Internet quieted down have now changed their tune. " I've not changed my tune at all, actually. It was very nice when it opened, it was perfectly fine as an opening day thing. As time went on, it needed additions. It's getting them. There were such outrageous comments, such as yours, that really were and are so extreme as to make any sort of reasoned comment a polar opposite. Basically, a lot of people online simply kiss up to a certain webmaster, and have no independent thought, and as shown here, almost no understanding of the industry they profess to be interested in. It's actually great they are going to add and change stuff to DCA. There was a good chance the place was never going to be built, and a lot of question as to whether or not a second gate could even possibly work in Anaheim. Now we're getting a reinvestment due to the SUCCESS of the changes in 2001. It's been six years. Really. Time for some folks to grab some sort of toe hold on reality.
Originally Posted By TP2000 So using that logic jonvn, you are going to be perfectly fine with them keeping the hip and edgy stucco walls and cement queue for King Triton's Carousel? All they need to do is add some more rides in that area surrounded by the same stucco walls and similar cement queues? After all, DCA is just fine the way it is, it just needs to add some things. Right? To be honest though jonvn, I do appreciate your attempt at spinning the troubles DCA has faced and the resulting 1.2 Billion Dollar Fix-It Budget into the same type of normal expansion all other parks go through. "They Do This To All Their Parks" was your mantra for quite a while when Al Lutz was leaking info on the formulating plans for DCA in '06 and early '07, although I haven't heard you say that since the 1.2 Billion Dollars became a solid rumor in July. I said it in 2001, and I'm still saying it in 2007: DCA as built is a cheap, unattractive and rather charmless park by Disney standards. DCA doesn't need to wait for better TV commercials, or better weather, or Tower of Terror to open. They need to dramatically rebuild and retheme almost the entire park. Thank goodness that is exactly what they are going to do. And thanks for the nice words from FerrotAfros and mstaft. I pulled the Cunard metaphor out of thin air, but after reading it again I think it works pretty good. ;-)
