Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<And since I'm being grumpy anyway, I have to express a bit of dismay to have a decidedly negative article on the homepage of the website. In the magazine, well, I wouldn't love it, but at least it is in that format. I would hate to see LP's website become lumped together with other sites that delight in pointing out the negative on a regular basis.>> Very good point. Quite valid, IMHO, too. I haven't been to TDS yet, but will be there this year! I have been to DCA (many, many times) and DSP a few. Lindsay is entitled to have any opinion he wants about anything, although if he writes it it can be pulled apart here. But I find it very interesting, and typical, that the ONLY negative story I have EVER read on this site is about a multi-billion park that's owned and operated by the OLC and not TWDC. No negative stories on DCA. None on DSP. No rip jobs on how bad cleanliness and upkeep are at WDW parks, even though those ultimately impact guest and FAN enjoyment. Nope. The first negative piece is on TDS. For a site that aims to be positive to a fault all the time regarding the Mouse, it just seems ... well, mildly odd. Oh, and I was at DCA today and had a GREAT time (even though I didn't win the 10-night European DCL cruise that was 'awarded' this morning!) before anyone says that I don't enjoy anything Disney does yada, yada and yada. BTW, the ToT was a walk on all day with NO FastPass operating. Must be a failure. Aladdin played to a half-empty crowd with numerous walk-outs. Must suck. There were huge swaths of walkways totally devoid of people. Park must be a failure.
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan Spirit, that was fantastic. Let's see leemac counter that, as he seems to be using the same logic .
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "And since I'm being grumpy anyway, I have to express a bit of dismay to have a decidedly negative article on the homepage of the website. In the magazine, well, I wouldn't love it, but at least it is in that format. I would hate to see LP's website become lumped together with other sites that delight in pointing out the negative on a regular basis." I thought the same thing. This is the first negative article I've seen on LP, and to be bashing TDS seems...strange...with so many other areas of critique even here in the US that you would think would be addressed first. Also, I have to say, that it really makes me not want to read Tales from the Laughing Place if it's going to be filled with negative op-ed pieces. They go out of their way to get interviews with the people behind the designs, yet then rip those designs apart? If I were the imagineers, I really don't know that I'd want to participate again. And, as for the TDS "too real" and DCA "whimsical" thing, I don't get that. Ok, TDS might be a little too realisitc and miss out on the Disneyfication of real places...much like AK, but DCA sure misses the mark when trying to tell a story as well. I actually like DCA, but I notice that rather than taking the TDS route of too much story, DCA has a lack of it in MANY areas. There are places like Paradise Pier and Hollywood Pictures Backlot that don't go far enough to tell a story. Places just scream out for more theme and Disneyfication, but fall flat. How that gets a passing grade but TDS fails for telling "too much" story is beyond me. At least they tried. Anyway, I just hope this is not a trend for LaughingPlace to get so negative, because that USED to be the refreshing thing about this site.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I don't know... I didn't read the story as all that "negative." In fact, the author went out of his way to say how beautifully detailed it was, what a great job the designers did and how he admired their work, etc. etc. The article almost seemed to me like a musing on "with all these great elements in place and all the undeniably fine work on display... why does the place lack that certain 'something' for me?" I think that's a valid question if, indeed, it did lack that certain "something" for him. Doesn't mean it lacks it for anyone else. He seems to think it lies in the park's desire to cross every T and dot every I, thus leaving less to the visitor's imagination. Not having been there, I can't say if *I* would feel the same way - but I think it's a valid way for HIM to feel. Everyone I've ever brought to DL for the first time just loved it. Except one. He's a New York sophisticate and he just found it unbearable. Didn't like it at all. What I see as marvelously stylized reality of a Frontierland or NOS, he sees as "fake" and "crass" and "commercial." What can you do? He just didn't like it. Doesn't make me think he's a bad person.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 But, I guess that's the thing. It's one guys opinion, but it's presented as fact. For a place that most people reading this site will never, ever see, it's kind of a shame that it's presented as a flawed place and might make people think twice about visiting. I'm not saying that people can't express their views on the place, whether negative or positive, or even in-between, but as a front page article it seems kind of cheap. Like something Jim Hill might have on his site. Also, why single out TDS and not just do an op-ed piece about Disney going "too real" in all parks, like TDS, AK, and EPCOT. Even so, I'm not sure I want to see that as front page news.
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan <<Also, why single out TDS and not just do an op-ed piece about Disney going "too real" in all parks, like TDS, AK, and EPCOT. Even so, I'm not sure I want to see that as front page news.>> I think that they are just prejudiced when it comes to TDS. Everyone agrees that Epcot and DAK suffer from the same problem, but they just don't seem to see that I guess.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 A good example would be Expedition Everest at AK. It is very heavily themed and goes for realism, as opposed to "Disneyfying" it like the Matterhorn. You could argue that the Yeti is the element of fancy, but they even went ultra-realistic with that, and made it as much like a real animal as possible. So, Joe Rohde gets a free pass on his realistic vision for AK, but TDS gets panned for the same realism?
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan I've tried explaining that to leemac in the past but he always dodges the bullet when he knows he's been backed into a corner. We already know that his opinions about TDS are all hypocritical and biased, so there's no point trying to explain anything to him.
Originally Posted By dlport It is so incredibly amusing to see many of the same people who have been personally critical of those who dare to say they like DCA, now getting up in arms over someone who made some critiques of the park that they prefer. The sword cuts both ways. You don't get to call people Disney "apologists" and say that anyone who disagrees with you about DCA is wearing "rose colored glasses", and then get your feelings hurt when someone points out some of their thoughts about your favorite park. As an example: >>Apparently your education and upbringing haven't prevented you from being a vindictive crybaby.<< Name-calling? Very nice, and quite ironic considering its author. The Laughingplace writer made some comments about the design of the park. It was one person's opinions. Instead of attacking the author, how about those who disagree offer a well-reasoned and courteous response on a point-by-point basis? It would probably make for an interesting discussion, be thought-provoking, and cause the readers to consider theme-park design in a new way. No, I guess it is just easier to call people names.
Originally Posted By maniac_disney I think I´m a reader of LP for 6 years and this is one of the first negative articles I´ve seen too (I tought it was a Jim Hill piece - Lol). 'Dlport' I know the author has the rights for his opinion (no problems with that!) but I think what people are saying here (tell me if I´m wrong) is that we can´t find articles in the same way "bashing" DCA or Animal Kingdom. I don´t remember reading those kind of articles on LP.com. We find the discussion here on LP Discussion Boards. But I agree is a more polite way to discuss ideas than persons. My two cents.
Originally Posted By kennect Maybe I am just dumb but I have read what has been posted here in the socalled abbreaviated version of this article...I simply don't understand the point of the article or what the writer is truly trying to say...I am confused...It seems we have an article that is trying to say the park doesn't appeal to the writer but they are mixing that in with quotes from WDI people that worked on the project...What is the point? The whole thing to me sounds like two different stories to be told seperately....
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan I don't get it either. His opinions seem to be the exact opposite of the quotes belonging to the WDI people. Why bother taking quotes if they have nothing to do with your point?
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan I forgot to mention one point I found in the article. It says that there's a correlation the S.E.A. and the DisneySea logo. What I find interesting is that the the word sea is capitalized in the logo is because Tokyo was capitalized too. The whole logo was meant to be in capitals but the Disney font had to remain the same. The name has always been Tokyo DisneySea, not DisneySEA. While I think the fact that the S.E.A. plaque is suggesting the overall theme for the park is logical, I always thought that the "seas" theme was evident through the park.
Originally Posted By u k fan As someone who has never been to any of the Tokyo parks I don't feel qualified to comment specifically on the content of the piece, but I do have a couple of points I'd like to chime in on. First, I found the quotes from the Imagineers to be in context and used to help Lindsay's point, although I'm not convinced they would have been said in that context originally. I have never been a fan of this type of journalism and hope that this is a one off. Second, I have had the opportunity several times to speak face to face with Lee and Lindsay about the Tokyo Resort and I have never heard them say anything negative about Japan or the Japanese people. I would consider sweeping statements of that kind to be racism of the worst kind and they would certainly affect my feelings towards them. I have never had cause to be offended by anything they have said. We all acknowledge here on LP that sometimes things that are written can be taken the wrong way, but it is difficult for this to be the case when speaking to someone in person. That's not to say that my opinion on this counts more than anyone elses, just that it's possible that something has bean read the wrong way. Finally, I am not surprised that this was chosen as the lead article for the magazine because controversy sells. How many other Disney forums will this article be mentioned on? My guess is plenty even if it's just to say "Can you believe what some idiot wrote about TDS on LaughingPlace?" I think it was a wise business move and an interesting move for the creative team behind Tales to make this a feature article. We must remember that this is just one man's opinion and is not presented as fact or as being endorsed by LP itself though I can see where confusion would occur. Oh, and one last point, to whoever made some comment about Tales... being the worst kind of Brit design... (I can't remember the exact quote) Way to go supporting the Pro TDS gang by being racist. One of the very points they are criticising Lee and Lindsay for. Funny how no one has mentioned that...!!!
Originally Posted By The Goddess Mara u k fan, please don't be so foolish as to state that my criticism of British design is racist--that's silly. I'm criticizing a style of design that is currently a fad in British publications. There's nothing racist about that--it's an aesthetic statement.
Originally Posted By u k fan I'll ignore the fact that you called me foolish because you've been very polite in your reply. Thank you for that. I will also admit that I was probably overreacting when I called it racist, but to me as a Brit I did take objection to what you wrote. It is a sweeping statement and completely unfounded as far as I'm concerned. There is a current trend in British publication design, but trust me it's a million miles away from what is being done with Tales. I think that's why I was so upset at that remark, because it's so off base that it comes of as uneducated an irrational - two words that could be used to describe racism!!!
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <I think that Laughing Place magazine is a design catastrophe (the worst of contemporary British "fad" design with type too small to read that's all over the place on the page with enormous photographs of tiny details)> It's the reason I only made it through one subscription -- LP Magazine is just WAAAYYYY over my head.
Originally Posted By u k fan Jim, I would urge you to give it another try. I completely agree with the fact that text sometimes seemed to be all over the place and as a glasses wearer I can attest to the fact that the font was too small, especially when reading it with only the light of a bedside lamp, but it has steadily improved with every issue. I am enjoying watching the magazine progress!!!
