Originally Posted By believe One thing missing on the pier is... The Beach. It suppose to be the sea side, so where's the beach (with sand). We don't need much, just a little section.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt “Maybe we're both dancing around a complete understanding of what each other is saying. You keep saying there is no legitimate E Ticket planned, and I say that is completely wrong.” No, what I said is that there is no “signature” E ticket on the show-stopping scale of something like Spaceship Earth or the American Adventure. Maybe Little Mermaid qualifies, but as I said, I'm not a big fan of that sort of subject matter. The RSR attraction is another thrill ride, I think DCA has plenty of thrill rides. The other two attractions are well themed spinners. But doesn't DCA have enough of those?
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "There are also e-tickets planned for phase 2 including a possible richly themed flume ride for Paradise Pier..." It sounds like Disney has committed DCA to be a thrill ride park. It might be a good strategy in contrast to Disneyland.
Originally Posted By dshyates "Maybe Little Mermaid qualifies, but as I said, I'm not a big fan of that sort of subject matter." I am not a fan of "Haunted Houses" either, but "The Haunted Mansion" is my favorite Disney attraction. I think "The Little Mermaid" will be a welcome addition to DCA. They need a family friendly AA filled E-Ticket. The scope of this attraction will easily rival HM. I do agree with Hans in that the biggest portion of the budget for phase 1 will be fixing the original problems with the crappy little park. I have loathed the entrance since day one. The Sun Court is an embarrassment. I like parts of the PP redo, but I really wish they would get rid of JJ and MM. And just move GZ to where OS is. Then work on getting some other turn of the century-type rides to flesh out the pier. The SS redo of OS, as DWB points out, makes it look even more like generic amusement park fare.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <It suppose to be the sea side, so where's the beach (with sand). We don't need much, just a little section.> There actually is a small section, with sand and the kind of grass that grows near the shore, that you can see on Screamin'.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "They need a family friendly AA filled E-Ticket. The scope of this attraction will easily rival HM." I still don't see why it has to be Mermaid though. Family friendly is exactly what the park needs, but I question how many 12 year old boys will be breaking their necks to ride a Little Mermaid ride no matter how spectacular it may be. The Nemo Subs is the perfect example of how E ticket technology was spent on a story line that appeals mostly to pre-schoolers.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney ^^I agree, I really like TLM idea in itself, but I do question why its even in DCA? I know they been trying for a long time to make this attraction and nice it finally happened, but then instead of putting it in more obvious places like the MK parks, MGM stuidios, TDS or even Epcot, it ends up at DCA??? Again, another perfect example of not only Disney going kiddie, but they are doing it with a park and a theme that called anything but that. I just wrote this in a different thread, but if you are going to change the image of DCA, CHANGE IT!!!! For starters, stop calling it DCA if every attraction that will go in from this point on is going to be about a DIsney or Pixar character....that just happens to be California . At least with TSMM, another kiddiefied Pixar match-up, they built the ride around the theme for a change, but TLM they just threw it in there and I remember people justifying the storyline here when it was announced. People kept saying we're not sure WHAT waters Ariel was in in the movie or what country she was near. She could be swimming off of San Franciso or something lol (forgetting the part where she actuallY DOES come on land--sort of a big plot point in it--and went to a castle and met a Prince---California was never a monarchy lol). Anyway, this just proves my point, I really do like the new additions and its obvious this is the approach Disney will be taking, so stop fooling themselves, go the extra distance, change the park that will more realistically reflect that. Hell, DCA has been one big kiddie addition for 5 years now, so call it Disney Magical Adventures or Disney Animationland or Disney Hodge Podge of stuff we dont have room to put into DL, so we are putting it here instead-Zone!! But to remake this park a kiddie land and keep telling your audience its still about California is really a joke and an insult to intelligence.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> But to remake this park a kiddie land and keep telling your audience its still about California is really a joke and an insult to intelligence. << That's why the theme of "California" should be chopped out ASAP. Besides, I've read that California currently has the third highest unemployment rate in the country, right after Mississippi, and that most of the new residents attracted to it, based on trends going back several years, are primarily refugees from very impoverished, desperate nations. So, in other words, "California" ain't all that it's cracked up to be. And regardless of the state's statistics and trends, I'd feel no differently about the idea of a "Disney's New York Adventure," or "Disney's Oregon Adventure," or "Disney's Illinois Adventure."
Originally Posted By dshyates Disney's West Virginia Adventure I'd be sort of like Dollywood without the class.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig >>>Family friendly is exactly what the park needs, but I question how many 12 year old boys will be breaking their necks to ride a Little Mermaid ride no matter how spectacular it may be.<<< The boys will go on it because they are part of the family group. They might not enjoy it as much as they do Pirates or TOT, but they'll go on it with their families and as such, Mermaid will absorb those boys off the outside walkways and provide much needed ride capacity. Then the families will drag the boys' little sisters onto Pirates or TOT or whatever, because that's what the boys want to ride, and the sisters will be asking to go back onto Little Mermaid. So then at some point they'll get back onto Little Mermaid, because that's what families do at Disney parks. >>>The Nemo Subs is the perfect example of how E ticket technology was spent on a story line that appeals mostly to pre-schoolers.<<< Finding Nemo grossed more than 600 million worldwide in it's initial release, then a bunch more on DVD, plus all the merchandising, etc. Those are the folks that Nemo Subs appeals to, not pre-schoolers as you claim. Movies aimed solely at pre-schoolers don't gross 600 million They don't even gross 60 million usually. Here again, just because an attraction doesn't appeal to YOU, Hans, you're more than eager to make false pronouncements such as Nemo Subs appealing mostly to "pre-schoolers", which is just simply a stupid statement which ignores the appeal of the source property, and ignores the fact that wait times for the attraction usually hover in the 90 minute range, or longer, and only a small fraction of the people in that line are pre-schoolers. I'm guessing you don't have children, do you Hans?
Originally Posted By pitapan16 I already heard TLM is being cloned at WDW, ONCE again like TSMM happened is being snatched up by its sister resort. But Radiator Springs wont be as easy I think." - I too like attractions that are only in one location, it feels alot more unique. But I imagine that most regular guests don't realize what is and is'nt a clone, and don't go enough to both resorts to make a financial dent for Disney to NOT continue cloning. But for a Disney guy like myself who visits both resorts, I LOVE the uniqueness of the resort attractions. Example, Soarin at Epcot is such a major draw for most visitors BUT its among the last on my Epcot list since I visit it at will when I go to Dland which is often. On the other hand, Everest is a MOST on my list because it is great, yes, but also because its only at Animal Kingdom. I guess my conclusion is that while I'd like everything unique and new, cloning makes good since for Disney and the guests when I break it all down. Just not every single thing.
Originally Posted By pitapan16 The more I hear about RSR, the more excited I get ." -I don't know you guys, I don't like rides that mess up my hair. \ Is there any way you think they might enclose certain cars for people who do the hair due's, or have a long strand of hair wrapped around their head?
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<- I too like attractions that are only in one location, it feels alot more unique. But I imagine that most regular guests don't realize what is and is'nt a clone, and don't go enough to both resorts to make a financial dent for Disney to NOT continue cloning.>> No, dont get me wrong, I'm not COMPLETELY unrealistic about this stuff and I realize Disney is a business at the end of the day where cloning just makes sense from a financial and marketing standpoint. Truth is, it doesnt bother me and for some odd reason when I go to a place like WDW, there is already SO much to see, its kind of nice I can check a ride off the list if I already rode it enough in Anaheim or somewhere else. I know its weird lol, but I guess its psychological. That said though, what DOES bother me is when they build an entire park--ala HKDL and dont even try to not only make anything unique, or at least try to get the best versions of the said clones. They place just went for bottom feeder attractions just to justify it opening and its really sad. Yes, there are a billion new customers who have never ridden Space Mountain before, but when you have people hearing they can get the same things for a bigger and better park just a few hours on a plane and a couple hundred dollars more, you are going to lose your audience besides the locals and thats what happening to that park. More Chinese probably still travel to TDR that can afford to then waste their time going to HKDL and why should they? DCA is another example and why I NEVER could understand the thinking about this initial parks opening. They didnt WANT to rely on the locals, but the out of towners, but instead of giving them very different attractions from WDW to lure those people away, 2/3rds of their attractions were either WDW or simple carnival based rides. Wouldnt it make MORE sense to push the park to the locals who probably dont go to WDW all that often instead of people who may make a choice between the two if you are going that route? They already have a bigger place to chose from to begin with and then you populate the new park with things many people who been to WDW has experienced. The people who designed and marketed this park should be fired....oh that's right, they were ;D. Anyway, in theory it really doesnt bother me and I been to every resort there is, just when they get reeeeally lazy and think throwing in a Space Mountain, 10 year old 3D films and spinners is going to get the desired effects and they stop there ultimately bothers me. Well, that trick is CLEARLY not working thank god, which is why DCA is getting (surprise, surprise) all new only-to-DCA new rides and shows now. You noticed in the redo, not a single clone ANYWHERE!! That's why I am cutting them maaajor slack on this now, it seems like they really did learn their lesson and making all the changes fans complained about the original park, one of them being too many clones. In fact the last ride clone WAS TOT which was 4 years ago, so its not like we arent noticing Disney . But I wish they change the name grrr!
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "For starters, stop calling it DCA if every attraction that will go in from this point on is going to be about a DIsney or Pixar character..." But it goes beyond that. My argument is that the park's content, even with Mermaid and RSR, is still going to be lacking. Again, this isn't about the park's theme; it's about the quantity and types of rides that are actually IN the park.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "The boys will go on it because they are part of the family group." Right, just like they'll go on Small World with the family too. But, at this point in DCA's history, I don't think that this is the kind of storyline that is needed at the park. I would prefer that they build something else. "I'm guessing you don't have children, do you Hans?" I don't have kids. But it doesn't take an expert on child psychology to know that a ride based on Disney's Little Mermaid won't do much to excite 12 year old boys, or their dads, about visiting DCA. "Here again, just because an attraction doesn't appeal to YOU, Hans, you're more than eager to make false pronouncements such as Nemo Subs appealing mostly to "pre-schoolers"..." Well of course. How many times do I have to tell you that this is my opinion? "... which is just simply a stupid statement which ignores the appeal of the source property, and ignores the fact that wait times for the attraction usually hover in the 90 minute range, or longer, and only a small fraction of the people in that line are pre-schoolers." Once again, I'm being told that my opinions are stupid. I don't get why or what you are arguing about. I think I've explained this as best as I can, and in my opinion you're making a big deal out of nothing.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig >>>Once again, I'm being told that my opinions are stupid. I don't get why or what you are arguing about. I think I've explained this as best as I can, and in my opinion you're making a big deal out of nothing.<<< I apologize for using the term "stupid" in my most recent criticism of your most recent statement. Specifically, what my meaning was is that your statement was not factual. You statement was a false claim based upon a personal bias not supported by facts. I tend to throw out flaming molotov cocktails of opinion myself, but I try to differentiate when my statements are based on opinion vs. based upon undisputed fact. For example: FACT: Condor Flats and GRR have a very large real world hotel rising up in the background, which has a prominent visual impact on those areas. OPINION: The hotel completely wrecks the theming of those two areas that it looms over.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt Specifically, what my meaning was is that your statement was not factual." Well of course it isn't factual, I never claimed anything other than that I was expressing my OPINION. Please reread this thread and I think you'll see that you've gotten a little carried away with this.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney "For starters, stop calling it DCA if every attraction that will go in from this point on is going to be about a DIsney or Pixar character..." <<But it goes beyond that. My argument is that the park's content, even with Mermaid and RSR, is still going to be lacking. Again, this isn't about the park's theme; it's about the quantity and types of rides that are actually IN the park.>> I get that and agree, I guess since these are both two VERY expensive attractions on top of a few smaller C attractions and WOC, I just dont expect all that much in this FIRST phase. I guess your thinking is once 2012 hits, that will be it for a long time where my thinking and the little bit of info thus far I'm aware of is more stuff will come! They just havent gotten that far in the details, worked out budgets or determined what will or wont work yet. I think they are simply waiting to see how people will respond to this update first before they take it farther. It is very funny to see how our stance has gone completely opposite on this park now lol, even though we are actually agreeing on 90% of it at the same time . I guess my overall feeling on it is there would still be about a dozen different changes I like to see if I had my way (#1 stop fooling themselves and change the name of it!!!! OR make more Calif based attratictions....wait, thats not going to happen either lol) I just have a wait-and-see approach and what IS there, I can honestly say I like. I understand you dont and that's cool, but DCA will be MILES better from where it is now and thats most important to me at the end of the day. Let's use a simple, but similar analogy to describe DCA today. Something fair but obvious that all people can agree on what DCA is sort of like. Let's take Baghdad, Iraq (see, fair ;D)!! Look how that city is in shambles, no one reeeaaally wants to go there either. Too much violence, electricity is out most of the time, much of the city still run down and destroyed, just not on the list for top best cities in the world to live....and then one day everyone gets electricity 24/7. They build a nice shopping mall, better infracstructure, wipe out the crime where people feel safe to walk anytime, develop more green spaces (or one) and build newer schools for the children. Is it still the best city in the world to live in? Nooo, but it is getting nicer and most importantly people who live there can honestly SEE the difference for a change and not think because one less violent act in the week automatically means a complete turnaround, yes. There is a fundamental shift in the city and mentality and for those people that's great....even if its still sucks. But the potential for it to be a great city is no longer a cruel joke in itself. And this is how I view the new DCA .
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <So, in other words, "California" ain't all that it's cracked up to be.> oh, brother...
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA I'm going on record here -- not that anyone gives a rip... I didn't like 'Cars' Therefore, an entire land based on 'Cars' does not excite me in the least. It gets a big 'whatever' from me. And 'Cars 2'? 'You can't top Cars with Cars' -- Mario Andretti
