Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<And in case I wasn't clear above, that management style is one that makes decisions based on finances first and foremost, and whims of the CEO second.>> You are absolutely correct on that. I don't know how it can be avoided though. It is the same story time after time after time when the visionary founder of a company dies and it is left to be run by others. Certainly you don't think Ford Motor Company today is run with the same vision and commitment to principle that it was when run by Henry Ford. Even when family remains involved it makes no difference. Just because one member of a family was a visionary does not mean that the others are too. In fact it most cases it means that the others are not. I'm not hugely happy about this, but I really don't know how it can be avoided. I don't know of ONE major corporation that did not take a step back when its founder left. Look at how Apple suffered when Jobs left and how it has flourished after his return. These guys are freaking geniuses and artists. They cannot be replaced by anyone else.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 Trippy, you should know by past threads what I think of Ford quality! ;-) But that's right ... Walt was a visionary ... a true genius and with Roy, who never gets enough credit, created an amazing team at both th Studios and WED (now WDI). Michael and Frank might have had the same potential, although I wouldn't call either a genius, just smart businessmen. But Frank died too young. Michael got gunshy. The oldtimers in the organization were marginalized, forced out, retired or died. Now we have Bob Iger, who has done some smart things in the early going ... but he is hardly a visionary. John Lasseter may well be ... jury's out on that one. But, on the theme park front, it's hard for me to give props to Iger when he still has Jay Rasulo and his puppet army running the parks. This man has about right to run those parks as I have to scrub up for brain surgery.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy "Spirit of 74 to WDW General, Spirit of 74 to WDW General---stat!"
Originally Posted By danyoung >Ya know, discounting my brand new clear with leaves NEVER DID YOU ANY HARM shower curtain is one thing, but to so brazenly "totally" discount it...that's when you cross the line and make someone leave the boards.< Alright, Tall, gimme details about your lovely new shower curtain!!
Originally Posted By MPierce >> 'The average person doesn't see this' -- seems to suggest that I shouldn't notice it either. << I truly am sorry if you took what I said as dismissing you or your opinion. I thought that I pointed out that by most of the visitors to the park just didn't take things like that as serious as big Disney fans. I never thought that you disagreeing with me was a personal attack on me. I disagree with Spirit on this subject, but I still value his opinions, just like yours. >> Or that perhaps I'm some sort of oddball for noticing it in the first place. << Please accept my apoloy Jim. My comments were never to make anyone feel like that.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy <Alright, Tall, gimme details about your lovely new shower curtain!!> Not like *that* I won't! ;-)
Originally Posted By Socrates Speaking of visual intrusions... Does anyone else remember that biplane that used to fly over WDW towing the "Church Street Station" banners? Now THAT was an intrusion! Socrates "Where can you get a machine gun when you need one?"
Originally Posted By Mr X They stopped invading Disney's restricted airspace when a famous fighter pilot came out of retirement to defend the homeland. <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://z.about.com/d/collectibles/1/0/l/B/DSdonaldd903.jpg&imgrefurl=http://collectibles.about.com/library/priceguides/blpgDSdonaldd903.htm&h=216&w=262&sz=18&hl=en&start=15&tbnid=zBaPFZNUXuCNtM:&tbnh=92&tbnw=112&prev=/images" target="_blank">http://images.google.com/imgre s?imgurl=http://z.about.com/d/collectibles/1/0/l/B/DSdonaldd903.jpg&imgrefurl=http://collectibles.about.com/library/priceguides/blpgDSdonaldd903.htm&h=216&w=262&sz=18&hl=en&start=15&tbnid=zBaPFZNUXuCNtM:&tbnh=92&tbnw=112&prev=/images</a>%3Fq%3Dairplane%2Bdisney%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG
Originally Posted By Mr X Boy I just screwed up this whole thread didn't I though, but the cool thing is I can write a really really really long absolutely ridiculous run-on sentence and only take up one line of text which is kinda neat but still annoying ain't it especially when I keep writing and writing and writing and the sentence just goes on and on and I STILL haven’t reached the end of the line!
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< But a nicely designed hotel using “entertainment architecture†off in the distance? I think most people today have no problem with that. >>> But then again, most guests don't know what forced perspective is. A guest standing in France that sees a replica of the Eiffel Tower with a hotel in the distance may not think twice about it as they don't even realize that before the hotel was there, the Eiffel Tower looked like it was actual size and off in the distance (I'm just repeating what others have said about this situation - I've never scoped it out myself while in the park). Most guests would be unable to put their finger on exactly what the Disney Difference is (especially these days as it becomes more and more a scarce commodity). To bring up yet another example of the current management problems, if you polled the guests and asked them to describe what's special about WDW, they might use words like "dreams" and "magic" - heck, you might even be able to create a marketing campaign out of that. But if you were to use that as an excuse to dump all of the traditional Disney Difference items, you might very well end up destroying the magic in the long run no matter how many guest polls you do.
Originally Posted By danyoung >...they don't even realize that before the hotel was there, the Eiffel Tower looked like it was actual size and off in the distance...< Maybe that's why the hotels don't bother me so much - the Eiffel Tower always looked like a little bitty thing up on top of one of the buildings in the France pavilion. It looked cool then, and it looks cool now.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 SuperDry ... post No. 150 nails it. WDW is becoming so much more about generic concepts like 'magic', 'dreams' and 'wishes' while all the DETAILS that have made them a reality for countless millions of guests get chipped away at. The issue certainly isn't (or absolutely shouldn't be whether people here aren't bothered by the placement of the Swan, Dolphin, Soarin show building, giant pin stand, wand etc ... no, the issue is how they destroy forced perspective, sense of place and theming whether people like them or not. The concept of 'it doesn't bother me so it's OK' is frankly troubling in a fan forum. There are plenty of folks who don't seem at all bothered by dirty bathrooms at Disney parks, lowered food quality, resort rooms that aren't maintained, crumbling infrastructure in the parks, buses and traffic and many other issues that plague WDW at 35 ... even if I weren't bothered by these things, I doubt I'd ever defend the decision-making that caused them because ... well, the Mouse has eyes and ears and if the most rabid fans don't seem to care, they're perfectly fine to continue WalMarting the product.
Originally Posted By danyoung >The concept of 'it doesn't bother me so it's OK' is frankly troubling in a fan forum.< I seem to have a problem getting my point through - no really, I don't think you & maybe Jim are seeing what I'm trying to say. I'm right there with you about hating the Walmarting declining by degrees diminishing of quality in the Disney parks. I want the bathrooms clean, I want the food service to be beyond incredible, I want the attractions to be every bit as great and immersive and detailed as the HM and Pirates. When I say that I'm not bothered by the Swan and the Dolphin, I'm NOT saying that yeah, they make the Epcot skyway look a little less special but I'm still OK with it. What I AM saying is that I JUST DON'T NOTICE ANY DIMINISHING! Ever since my first visit during Epcot's first week of operation back in '82, I've always seen the skyline of the World Showcase as a very unique and special sight that you couldn't get anywhere else. I mean, the Eiffel Tower sharing the skyline with a Morrocan prayer tower and a Japanese tower and a big ol' golf ball just SCREAMS Epcot to me, and it's a sight that I'll always treasure. When you add the Swan and the Dolphin to that mix, you don't take away a thing, IMO - it's just another couple of elements to this unique skyline. Others don't agree, and I think I understand why. But please don't lump me in with the "I don't care about quality" folks because in this one situation I don't have the same problem with a visual as you do. Whew - was that harsh? I'm currently having a stupid online fight with one of my pig-headed brothers, so I may be running on a little too much steam . . .
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 Danny, I wasn't speaking of you (or any other poster) but in general terms. I'm sure you've read (you are one of the few Texans who can, after all) books on Imagineering by folks like John Hench about forced perspective and placement etc ... so clearly I think you get that EPCOT Center wasn't designed to have two huge resorts with whimsical (some would say tacky) fish and swans looming over the World Showcase. Just SSE wasn't designed to have a disembodied Mickey arm holding a wand over it ... just like Disney-MGM wasn't designed to have a giant cartoon hat/pin stand at the end of Hollywood Blvd. blocking the park's weenie (why do I want to giggle like a school girl now?) So whether those things bother you or anyone else is totally not salient at all to a discussion on their placement. Basically, Disney decided to throw out the book (that it's creators honed for decades) and plop anything, anywhere if it was convenient and added to the bottom line. I don't look up in horror at the Swan and Dolphin or even the ToT poking up in the background. But I do remember how the place looked in the 1980s when those distractions weren't on the horizon screwing with the scale of the park.
Originally Posted By danyoung Well, Spirit, we're 50/50 on where we stand on the "distractions". Wand? Hate it. Hate any variation of it. Let's get back to the pure geodesic sphere. BAH? Hate it (or at least hate the position it occupies). TOT? Doesn't bother me in the least, and I actually like its position at the end of its own street. Swan & Dolphin? Don't really feel one way or the other. They're just a couple more items in a very interesting and unique skyline. But I'm with you on the main point - that Disney design folks are giving a lot less weight to those design principles that made Disneyland the completely revolutionary product that it was. Now I'm gonna go read a book - maybe one with pitchers in it . . .
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> before the hotel was there, the Eiffel Tower looked like it was actual size and off in the distance << It still does, except in those few sight lines where the hotel buildings actually appear behind the Eifel Tower. That's at least a minority of the sight lines that are there.
