Originally Posted By vbdad55 ^^^^^^^^^^^ I second the thanks -- sometimes difficult to follow some of the stories and there have interesting premises that one wants to understand
Originally Posted By TDLFAN After all this time, I can't beleive I passed up on an easy joke with this topic... Here it goes.. >>Disney must be doing something right!!<< In Tokyo that is!!! LOLOLOL!!!!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I don't want to get into the Kirk situation but Steve really did himself no favors at WDI. He burnt a lot of bridges with both his own TDS team and WDI management. I think that will make it hard for him to work with WDI with his new venture. Time will tell.>> I would hope the Kirks have some relationship with WDI in the future. I know there have been talk (at least thru informal channels) about Steve coming back to WDI, which he has supposedly rebuffed. But I can't help but think that putting aside the individuals, that there's a distancing (if not outright contempt) that many at WDI hold for TDS and the team that created it because it's precicisely (and I know you don't like the park, Lee, but that places you in a tiny minority)the kind of epic type park fans wanted in Anaheim, and expect of Disney, and got the DCA disaster instead. There's a prevalent attitude amongst the fanboys and girls, not to mention longtime Disney followers, that the Oriental Land Company outDisney's Disney nowadays in everything from cleanliness and upkeep to CMs to new attractions to live entertainment to attention to detail to keeping the parks fresh etc ... and that 'tude always makes the efforts stateside (especially in Florida) pale in comparison. I've noticed that there's nothing that makes a Disney exec squirm as much as when you talk about TDL and the OLC vs. the Disney owned parks. It's almost as if they treat the Tokyo parks like the 'red-headed stepchild' because they feel a little (or a lot) inadequete. To make it about individuals again, I compare it on a much smaller extent to the way WDI worked to neuter Tony Baxter -- and I'm no crazy fanboy that loves Tony, frankly he gives me the creeps as a person, but I do appreciate his VAST talent -- after he created DLP. Even in its neglected state, the park is simply an amazing template for what a 21st century MK-style park should be. But that's not the direction Disney wanted to head, so they marginalized the man and blamed him for the Tomorrowland '98 fiasco and pushed him into his office. Just a few thoughts to ponder ...
Originally Posted By leemac Interesting POV '74. <<blamed him for the Tomorrowland '98 fiasco >> To be fair he should be blamed for it. It was a disaster from start to finish and he was the exec producer on the project. <<But I can't help but think that putting aside the individuals, that there's a distancing (if not outright contempt) that many at WDI hold for TDS and the team that created it because it's precicisely (and I know you don't like the park, Lee, but that places you in a tiny minority)the kind of epic type park fans wanted in Anaheim, and expect of Disney, and got the DCA disaster instead.>> Wanted and expect are one thing but would SoCal-ers be willing to pay for it like the Japanese do? Sorry, no way. You can argue that the theme isn't appealing to locals but ultimately they built the park in the right way budget-wise as there simply isn't the business case for a $2bn park straight out the gates. As I've said before borrowing money is very cheap in Japan and OLC are heavily geared (which is typical for that market). Disney couldn't afford that or even be able to raise the funds. I've been bashed on numerous occasions over my opinions of the SoCal market and I'm sure that paragraph above will open me up to more. I truly advocated WDP&R leaving Disneyland as a one-park resort and building elsewhere.
Originally Posted By danyoung >It was a disaster from start to finish and he [Baxter] was the exec producer on the project.< Everything I've read about this indicates that the original plans for DL's TL redo were spectacular, but massive budget cuts left us with the unspectacular results. If this is the case, then Tony is in no way at fault - you can only work with what you have, and if he didn't have the funds to fulfill the plans, then what we got is not really his fault.
Originally Posted By danyoung >>>Disney must be doing something right!!<< In Tokyo that is!!! LOLOLOL!!!!< Now THAT'S FUNNY, TDLFAN!!!
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>To be fair he should be blamed for it. It was a disaster from start to finish and he was the exec producer on the project.<< And Lee dear... who should we blame for the fiasco that is TL at the MK today??
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ Good question. I honestly can't remember who was responsible for the transformation. I know the creative team behind Alien Encounter but their remit didn't extend beyond the attraction. I'll have a think on that. Funnily enough Eisner hated MK's TL. Loved Alien Encounter but hated the TL.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Interesting POV '74.>> <<blamed him for the Tomorrowland '98 fiasco >> <<To be fair he should be blamed for it. It was a disaster from start to finish and he was the exec producer on the project. >> If that's the only criteria for someone than what does that say for Barry Braverman? These things are never black-and-white. There were some creative issues that you could certainly question Tony for. Things like leaving the old Star Jets on the platform as some kind of space communicator. Or sticking a 3D movie that was already seven years old and tired in Florida into T-land. But how much was really in Tony's hands? Was it his idea to turn an attraction into dining (Red Rockets) when another dining locale just next door (Space Place) had been closed and walled off so no one but regulars knew it existed? Was it his idea to stick a giant ball with water in the center of the land? Was it his idea to not update Star Tours with the new trilogy about to debut? Was it his fault that GM pulled out of its sponsorship deal for Rocket Rods after the Test Track fiasco? Was it his fault that they still kept slashing funds from RR's and basically had an E-Ticket stillborn? Again, I can't say Tony was faultless. But it sure seems like he was put in a no-win situation. Disney wanted a new Tommorowland with very little new in it. Bronze paint is way kewl, but it only goes so far. <<But I can't help but think that putting aside the individuals, that there's a distancing (if not outright contempt) that many at WDI hold for TDS and the team that created it because it's precicisely (and I know you don't like the park, Lee, but that places you in a tiny minority)the kind of epic type park fans wanted in Anaheim, and expect of Disney, and got the DCA disaster instead.>> <<Wanted and expect are one thing but would SoCal-ers be willing to pay for it like the Japanese do? Sorry, no way.>> We'll never know. That opportunity never presented itself. I know that in terms of scale and quality, both Westcot (a ridiculous name but ...) and Port Disney were a whole lot more ambitious. They were -- unlike DCA -- designed the way Disney had gone about building parks. DCA threw the formula away, while the execs in Anaheim, Glendale and Burbank arrogantly thought people would love it just because the Disney name was on it. <<You can argue that the theme isn't appealing to locals but ultimately they built the park in the right way budget-wise as there simply isn't the business case for a $2bn park straight out the gates.>> I won't argue that point because I disagree with it. I LIKE DCA's theme. I think California has an incredible wealth and diversity of themes and subjects to build a themed entertainment venture around. The execution is what I have issues with, and I don't know if you recall this from my old days here but I LIKE DCA. I just see its flaws and can't see why the powers didn't before it even opened. As for a $2 billion park out of the gate. No, I agree with you that would have been a foolish expenditure in Anaheim at that point. BUT (and you knew there'd be one) I also think that $600 million was a ridiculously low amount to spend on a new park. I know the figure Disney tosses around is $1.2 billion, but included in that figure is the Grand Californian, Downtown Disney, the Mickey and Friends Parking Gar...I mean Structure (no garages in SoCal) and various infrastructure. I don't think spending a billion for a theme park alone would have been too much. I also, as I've said, don't feel like all the money spent was well-spent (a common problem at WDI, doncha think?). <<As I've said before borrowing money is very cheap in Japan and OLC are heavily geared (which is typical for that market). Disney couldn't afford that or even be able to raise the funds.>> I agree about Japan, however, I have a hard time with Disney not being able to raise the funds. How much money did they pay out to Ovitz? What about 'the little midget?' How much money went to Go.com? The Anaheim Angels? The Mighty Ducks? FOX Family? Club Disney and other failed DRE concepts? I'd say there are billions there, right? I am not someone that says Disney should throw money away on parks. But it always makes me wonder when people say Disney needs to be cautious with spending/reinvesting in its parks (a core business) only to see it throw billions away on non-core businesses. <<I've been bashed on numerous occasions over my opinions of the SoCal market and I'm sure that paragraph above will open me up to more. I truly advocated WDP&R leaving Disneyland as a one-park resort and building elsewhere.>> I won't bash you or anyone else for saying the SoCal market is quite different from the Tokyo one ... or the Orlando one ... or the HK one etc... And I think overall, the DLR development was a HUGE SUCCESS. Yes. You read that right. Look at what a dump the area was before. Now look at it. The GC is a beautiful resort. DD is such an enjoyable place to go ... and worlds better than the Orlando and Paris versions. And look at all the urban renewal that's come about. That's been the legacy/true success of the resort expansion. The problem is the park. It was when it was conceived. It still is five years after opening. But it can be made into a great park. It just needs someone with a true vision. None of this place-making crap. Just make a plan ... one that makes sense. Then transform the place bit-by-bit into what it should have been to begin with.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Funnily enough Eisner hated MK's TL. Loved Alien Encounter but hated the TL.>> He should have thought about that at budget time. Much like DL's complete disaster redo, look at how much got cut from the original plans for the MK ...why do I feel like going and getting a list of the Disney Decade Eisner proclaimed in 1990 and seeing how 80% of it never made it beyond proclamation stage!
Originally Posted By TDLFAN Please do. I always get a kick of the many projects that got axed before they were even concidered for real... something similar to the Million Dreams promotion... Promise now, and try deliver later. Or better yet, read Kenversations article on DL's 35th. A similar list to what DL was to have become is posted there for all to enjoy.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "And I think overall, the DLR development was a HUGE SUCCESS. Yes. You read that right. Look at what a dump the area was before. Now look at it. The GC is a beautiful resort. DD is such an enjoyable place to go ... and worlds better than the Orlando and Paris versions." I couldn't have said it better myself. I totally agree.
