Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt The Los Angeles Times has a somewhat cynical review of DLR's latest promotion - Summer Nightastic. "To paraphrase Uncle Walt: Disneyland will never be complete as long as old shows can be repackaged as new again." Ouch. While there's is a bit of unveiled meanness in the tone, there's also a bit of truth in that almost none of what is in the lineup is new or original. More at the link. <a href="http://travel.latimes.com/daily-deal-blog/index.php/disneyland-nightasti-4424/" target="_blank">http://travel.latimes.com/dail...ti-4424/</a>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan This is written by the same stooge whose wife was "in tears" trying to scam the free birthday promotion a couple months ago.
Originally Posted By SleepingBeauty82 Seems like the person who wrote it didn't write it to review it, he wrote it to be cynical. He's probably not even a Disney fan. That being said, I agree that Nightastic is sort of a boring attempt at making the park seem new and exciting this summer but are they supposed to come up with something spectacular every year? I also hate how he criticizes the "construction zone next door". He's complaining that there's nothing new and exciting going on but complaining that something new and exciting is being constructed. Sometimes you gotta make a mess to make a masterpiece! My kitchen after I make dinner is living proof!
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt LOL. Are you serious? Okay, his credibility is questionable. Which makes me wonder why would the Times assign him to write this story when he's already been shown to be biased against the place. Nonetheless, I do agree with his general viewpoint that the current promotion is a little feeble.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Yeah, there was a thread here about it at the time. >>Which makes me wonder why would the Times assign him to write this story when he's already been shown to be biased against the place.<< I think you answered your own question. ; )
Originally Posted By SleepingBeauty82 Maybe he has a contract or something. Or maybe he works for cheap.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones Old shows ARE being recycled in the midst of a recession to appear new again. I don't see how he said anything wrong. If people want to see the "enhancements," then they'll go. If they don't want to see the enhancements, like myself, then they won't go. Why do people get so bent out of shape when Disneyland is criticized?
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Old shows ARE being recycled in the midst of a recession to appear new again. I don't see how he said anything wrong." Well yes, and that was MY point, and I agree. However, the author's tone was a bit negative, and now we know why. "Why do people get so bent out of shape when Disneyland is criticized?" I have no idea. It happens a lot though.
Originally Posted By TP2000 After the fools that Brady MacDonald and his wife Nancy Luna made of themselves over getting Nancy's free birthday loot at the Guest Relations window, I take anything he or his wife write in their respective newspapers with a huge grain of salt. They behaved so poorly, and continued to defend their actions and positions as if they had the moral high ground on a very silly topic, that I just lost all respect for them. Their opinions on weighty and important topics like theme park parades and fast food joints in the suburbs don't resonate with me any longer. (Brady's wife Nancy Luna is a Food Reporter for the OC Register, and she has a blog on the Register website called "Fast Food Maven".) Their respective newspapers might want to consider creating a policy of having their employees not embarass themselves in public with self-absorbed pettiness, and then blog about it as if the entire world was in the wrong and they were in the right. Quite frankly, it's ruined their credibility.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones It's funny that Disneyland fans supposedly pride themselves on civil discussion and positivity UNTIL Disneyland is criticized. Then they start calling people fools, annoying, you name it. Man, the hypocrisy is amazing. "However, the author's tone was a bit negative, and now we know why." It was entertaining. The tone was negative because he had a negative opinion.
Originally Posted By Mickeysbestfan ++This entry was posted on Friday, April 24, 2009 at 9:49 pm by Brady MacDonald ++ What is interesting is that he wrote this before any of the Nightastic stuff was in effect. He simply wrote what was going to happen for the summer, not if any of it was good. His wording gives an impression that he has seen it and formed an opinion on how it was executed. ++With a heavy sprinkling of pixie dust, Disney has transformed what is normally regarded as periodic maintenance and “plussing” into a smorgasbord of “all new” offerings. A look at the what’s-old-is-new-again lineup:++ So unless he had actually seen a preview of all the summer changes, all he has really done is reworded the press release Disneyland put out about Nightastic.
Originally Posted By SleepingBeauty82 I just think he contradicts himself because he's complaining that there's nothing new but then complains about the mess they're making constructing something new. That's not me being being uncivilized and hypocritical, it's me making an observation.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper I think to really pull off the Nightastic promotion, Disney needed to produce one all new spectacular night show and plus all the others. Magical is almost new (I say almost because the theme song is 16 years old) and it’s a nice show. The biggest problem is that Remember was a spectacular show. I saw many people moved to tears by Remember. To me Magical is Fantasy in the Sky reworked with all the new toys developed for Believe and Remember, plus Dumbo. It’s a fun show, but I don’t see it moving anyone to tears. So Disney went from spectacular to nice and built a promotion around it. And it’s going to be great to have the Pinocchio and Snow White units back in the Electrical Parade. I, for one, don’t understand why they’ve been missing all these years. And I can’t wait to hear what they’ve done to the soundtrack. I like the Dreamlights soundtrack very much and I look forward to hearing how they’ve adapted it. I can’t argue with their decision to replace the Blue Fairy with Tinkerbell. It’s been my experience that most non-Disneyphiles, don’t have a clue who the Blue Fairy is when she comes rolling down the parade route. Most people are familiar with Tinker Bell, and I think she will make a better introduction to the parade. As for the Dragon in Fantasmic… I always felt it was the show’s biggest flaw. The rest of the show is amazing grade A stuff. It’s builds to this terrific climax, and then the Dragon shows up looking like a construction crane with tattered rags hanging off of it. I always found myself squinting when she appeared, trying not to see the armature. I couldn’t be happier that they’re finally putting a fully realized dragon into the show—when they finally get it to work, anyway. So, that’s the Nightastic promotion. Magical is definitely a downgrade from Remember and Believe. As far as the Electrical Parade and Fantasmic, they are merely fixing problems these shows have had for years. Some executive thought these things could be successfully marketed to the public as a reason to visit the resort this summer. Perhaps they’re right. The reviewer obviously thought Disney was taking something fairly weak and trying to build it into something bigger than it is. I’m glad Disney’s making the attempt, because I have a feeling that if they didn’t believe these fixes were marketable, they might never have happened at all.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones It's a stop-gap measure for a Summer in the midst of a recession. That Brady McDonald and his wife complained about some stupid promotion at Disneyland doesn't change that fact. "So unless he had actually seen a preview of all the summer changes, all he has really done is reworded the press release Disneyland put out about Nightastic." And he gave his opinion on what the press release contained. One thing press releases and advertising do is try to convince people to go to the park and see the new stuff. You don't need to actually see the new stuff in person to decide if you want to go. People decide *to go* without seeing the new stuff in person. They do it because something about it piqued their interest. If your interest isn't piqued, you don't go and I want to hear from people who are not interested in the new entertainment offerings and why, as well as from the people who enjoyed the new offerings.
Originally Posted By dlkozy >>>"This is written by the same stooge whose wife was "in tears" trying to scam the free birthday promotion a couple months ago."<<< I still wonder if that really happened or if the writer of that piece embellished upon a situation to create the story that he did. I haven't decided.
Originally Posted By danyoung >It's funny that Disneyland fans supposedly pride themselves on civil discussion and positivity UNTIL Disneyland is criticized. Then they start calling people fools, annoying, you name it. Man, the hypocrisy is amazing.< I don't see how it's wrong for people to post their opinions about a columnist, especially if recent history has shown that said columnist has a bias. I don't begin to understand why he felt the need to write the article with that tone. Disney is simply doing a marketing thing, the same as they've done since the 50's, to dress up a summer with no real big new E ticket attractions, and make it look like something fun and new. I don't see a thing wrong with that.
