Originally Posted By oc_dean Lets put this into a different perspective: Disneyland an established world class theme park from 1955. Low and behold ... Look what turns up in Florida in 1971 - A second "Disneyland". No one thought then they would get a second gate only 11 years later, that turns out to be a World Class establishment itself: EPCOT 8 years later ... a less ambitious, yet still very detailed THIRD gate prevails, and within it's FIRST SIX YEARS .. adds quite a few quality additions to establish it a worthy companion to it's first and second successors. Then we get word Eisner wants to build a Second Gate in Long Beach .. quickly turns to Anaheim all around 1989-1992. Disneyland Paris opens with much of the same tendor love as previous parks .... and then 6 years later, Animal Kingdom opens .. though a bit shy on attractions, the attention to detail is there!! That puts us now in 1998. You grow up ... seeing Disney at their best .. as they did solidly since 1955 ..... delivering one excellent park after another ...... You devote your life to ONLY the best theme parks this world can deliver. (Only Disney can do that!!) The anticipation high ... knowing that after one quality park after another ... Disneyland's first companion park HAS TO be a bonafide quality park! And this is what we get come 2001?! Well .... if I could pull the state of Florida, Tokyo DisneySea, and DLP closer to California ... I would have fairly easy access to these places. But .. I'm just an average citizen .. making an average citizen's salary. I'm sure that speaks for nearly everyone here. Unless you got money pouring out of your pockets. Disney didn't want to deliver in Anaheim, California ........ So if someone's going to tell me I shouldn't be pissed off ......... Stop and re-read what I just wrote!
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "What is particularly upsetting to many people is the great lost opportunity that DCA represents." Believe or not I can appreciate this sentiment. Yet, I am not outraged. It is a curious thing to me how passionate people can be about how "bad" they perceive DCA to be. These individuals did not build it, they did not contribute to its design, nor did they front one dime to construct it, yet they are upset or worse. It has been six years now and many of the same people who were mad then are mad now. Strange. Even weirder is the double standard many people possess in regards to the DL vs. DCA topic.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "So if someone's going to tell me I shouldn't be pissed off" Pissed off? Why do you feel that you have the right to be "pissed off" about something that you didn't even contribute to? Don't you think that attitude is rather arrogant on your part? You don't own Disneyland. Seriously, I'm wondering why you feel this way.
Originally Posted By oc_dean You wanna know how I just read that? The everyone on the planet should just accept mediocrity or less .. because that's just the way the world is. I don't have that kind of a value system Hans. Never will! It's people who hold a higher standard .. who give the world hope for becoming a better place with time.
Originally Posted By oc_dean ^^^^^ my post was in reference to #83 And Hans ... I just don't think you're going to quite understand what I'm trying to explain. So why don't we just agree .. that we both disagree on the subject of DCA .. and just leave it at that?. Okay? Thanks.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Perhaps it is a difference of opinion about what "upset" means. I get upset when my cola goes flat. The lost opportunity that is DCA makes me upset. >>It is a curious thing to me how passionate people can be about how "bad" they perceive DCA to be. These individuals did not build it, they did not contribute to its design, nor did they front one dime to construct it...<< What is that supposed to mean? That only people who build and finance theme parks are qualified to have an opinion, and a qualified opinion at that? I do not regularly come onto the boards to "bash" DCA. But I am only too happy to offer very cogent arguments to explain why it is so bad. Yes, it is easy to dismiss the repeated tired cry of "DCA sucks." But it is quite another thing to dismiss carefully thought out analysis in the same way. DCA is not "perceived" as bad. It is bad. Simply put, it is a bad theme park by almost any imaginable measure. That is not to say that everyone should villify it. Or that there is something wrong with people who like it. (I will tell you a little secret-- I kind of like DCA. Always have. But I know it is bad.) I even have a succinct statement on why DCA is bad. DCA was cynically conceived and poorly executed. If anyone cares, I would be happy to expand on that statement anytime, anywhere. Indeed, I have written a few lengthy posts in the past on that very topic. The most reasonable response I have gotten from the supporters of DCA is, "Well, that's just one man's opinion." Fair enough.
Originally Posted By Socrates (I'm probably going to regret asking this, but...) When you say bad, do you mean bad for Disney, or bad period? Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By DlandDug I mean to say that DCA is a bad theme park. Certainly, by Disney standards it is particularly bad.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<You devote your life to ONLY the best theme parks this world can deliver.>> Not entirely sure by what you mean by that statement. Perhaps you have devoted some or even a large measure of money and time on Disney, but your life? <<Disney didn't want to deliver in Anaheim, California>> It was the design and funding that failed, not the desire. <<So if someone's going to tell me I shouldn't be pissed off ......... Stop and re-read what I just wrote!>> I think it's okay to be angry... for a little while. But six years later? <<It's people who hold a higher standard .. who give the world hope for becoming a better place with time.>> If it makes you feel better, the three folks disneywatcher likes to hate are all gone from the company.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<DCA is not "perceived" as bad. It is bad.>> I said that already. Maybe we could say it's a bad Disney theme park, but a fair to good amusement park? Just food for thought.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I'm personally not upset with how DCA turned out. I'm more disappointed. I would be upset if they had picked a theme that was very narrow and didn't leave any room for expansion, or if they had picked a great theme, done a great job, and nobody showed up. I'm nore disappinted in how they cut corners and took things out that would have made this OK park absolutely amazing. If the potential, and even plans, for something amazing wasn't there, I don't think I would be nearly so depressed about it. But there are so many things that they could have done better (Circle of Hands comes to mind right away), and additions gone wrong (Flik's), that it's just sad to think about how the park looks now.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt “That only people who build and finance theme parks are qualified to have an opinion, and a qualified opinion at that?†I get what you are saying, however, it is one thing to upset, it's another thing to outraged. No one is saying that you are not entitled to your opinion or that it is invalid. You seem to be at least attempting to engage in a meaningful discussion. “I mean to say that DCA is a bad theme park. Certainly, by Disney standards it is particularly bad.†I think that Knott’s is a terrible park. One of the worst I’ve ever been to, frankly. I went once and I’ll likely never go again. Yet, there are people who post here regularly who seem to love the place. Do I question their judgement or tastes because of it? No. Do I go to Internet discussion boards and rant endlessly about “missed opportunities†at Knott’s? No. Do I waste time digging up less than credible examples to support my claims? No. Funny thing is, this is exactly the kind of behavior exhibited here in regards to DCA and I think it’s peculiar.
Originally Posted By onlyme >>I'm personally not upset with how DCA turned out. I'm more disappointed.<< My sentiments, exactly. My wife and I go to the Parks, once every 4-6 weeks, usually for a couple of days. I spend, at the most, 4 hours at DCA. As I'm walking around and riding the two or three attractions I enjoy or waiting in a huge line for a corndog that's really not that great, I think about what could have been, but I don't dwell on it. For now, it's what it is. Maybe it will 'get better', maybe not. But I really don't mind if someone is outraged over DCA's perceived failures. Just don't forget your Tums BTW, I, too, hate knotts. When I was a child(in the 60's and 70's), I thought it was cool, but now, I refuse to go. It stinks. Either Knotts has changed or I have. I'm sure a lot of 'unenlightened' children like DCA, as well. But, what do they know?
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Interesting to see the term the Motley Fool uses for DCA... <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17185489/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17 185489/</a> >>If Disney's troubled California Adventure park can be saved, it will be mostly due to next year's addition of Toy Story Mania, the likely rollout of Carland Radiator Springs in a few years, and the Monsters Inc. dark ride that replaced one of the lamest attractions in the park.<<
Originally Posted By ChurroMonster Amen Hans. Peculiar behavior indeed. I really don't care that much if people hate the park as long as they are not present when I'm trying to enjoy it. But I'd like to address the topic of disappointment that's been brought up repeatedly. As someone who's been an active participant in Disneyland discussion groups for nearly a decade I don't recall a single person expressing they were NOT disappointed by DCA. Even those of us that enjoy the place were absolutely disappointed in either the theme of the park or its execution. It is a flawed park, no question. But that doesn't mean that it is a worthless park. Most functional human beings can find plenty to do there that is fun. You can like aspects of the park without selling your soul to the business philosophy that created it. And that's a line that so many people here seem unwilling to cross. That somehow admitting the park has some positive qualities automatically means you think Eisner and Pressler and Braverman weren't collectively raping Walt's legacy. It's okay, guys, to like some things even when you hate the idea that created those things. When you see the world in black and white you fail to see that the world is 99% shades of gray.
Originally Posted By Socrates "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By mstaft DCA is not a worthless park at all. Disney can and has, however, done much better. Therein lies the rub.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> If it makes you feel better, the three folks disneywatcher likes to hate are all gone from the company. << But their foolishness and creative boneheadedness may have outlasted them at the DisCo. I'm referring to an article at miceage.com last year about certain Imagineers (or DisCo executives) believing that improving DCA's placemaking was unnecessary or unimportant.
