Originally Posted By oc_dean Another good example of the "pavilion" debate .. Is how Rocket Rods was originally drawn up on the drawing boards. The waiting room was one exhibit, the 360 screen theater was another leg of the multi-phased attraction .. the tunnel leading to the station was another segment, the Rocket Rods themselves was "part 4", and (Not just yet!) .. couldn't exit till you experienced "Part 5" with the Post Show.
Originally Posted By juicer But how does Califia know at the end of every show a lady is going to forget her handbag?!
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "There's nothing to distinguish them from a point of spectacle, or make them particularly worthy of the time of a Disney Theme Park Guest." Nor are the Main Street Cinema or the Frontierland Shootin' Gallery. Yet there they are, basically the same no frills attractions that they were back in 1955. The point is, not everything at a Disney park needs to be a fabulous spectacle to be good or entertaining.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <"I too think Golden Dreams is an excellent film .. but there's just not a heck of a lot of things to "accompany" it." This is exactly the problem.> This is why I think it would work much better as part of a "Welcome to California" complex near the central plaza.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <The point is, not everything at a Disney park needs to be a fabulous spectacle to be good or entertaining.> Boy, I've been crowing that same sentiment about 'Golden Dreams' since Day One.
Originally Posted By seanyoda Count me and smeeeko as two more who like both Golden Dreams and Seasons of the Vine. We'll watch Golden Dreams every few visits, and catch Seasons of the Vine at least once each season.
Originally Posted By pitapan16 Count me in boys...I like Seasons of the Vine on every visit, and Golden Dreams nearly as much. It's no show-stopper, but they are well done.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>"There's nothing to distinguish them from a point of spectacle, or make them particularly worthy of the time of a Disney Theme Park Guest." Nor are the Main Street Cinema or the Frontierland Shootin' Gallery. Yet there they are, basically the same no frills attractions that they were back in 1955. The point is, not everything at a Disney park needs to be a fabulous spectacle to be good or entertaining.<<< That's because they're not TOUTED as major, centerpiece attractions. They're mild, diversionary, minor amusements. In a park with many other centerpiece attractions. DCA doesn't have that much to position as centerpiece attractions. What you described on Main Street, would be the various amusements within the Animation Building - Ursula's Grotto or the Beast's Library. They're diversions. GOLDEN DREAMS is a good long sit, in a dolled-up theater. A guest would expect it to be rather exceptional by its positioning, housing, theme and prominence. It's not.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror For clarity: >>>What you described on Main Street, would be the various amusements within the Animation Building - Ursula's Grotto or the Beast's Library. They're diversions.<<< Should read: THE EQUIVALENT in DCA to what you describe on Main Street and Frontierland, are the various minor amusements within the Animation Building's Sorcerer's Workshop: Grotto, Library, etc.
Originally Posted By cstephens BlueOhanaTerror wrote: > GOLDEN DREAMS is a good long sit, in a dolled-up theater. A guest would expect it to be rather exceptional by its positioning, housing, theme and prominence. It's not. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about Innoventions... /cs
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "That's because they're not TOUTED as major, centerpiece attractions." Neither are Golden Dreams or Seasons of the Vine.
Originally Posted By gadzuux SotV is rather humble and diversionary in it's presentation - golden dreams isn't - I agree completely with BOT up above. It's centrally located at the crossroads of the park, with an enormous rotunda and big colorful banners touting whoopi goldberg - ironic too, since she's a bit player in this production, and I believe she even goes uncredited - except for the banners which were added years after opening. 'Golden Dreams' definitely has pretensions of being a BFD disney attraction - positioned as a centerpiece and even lynchpin to the park. Some people have expressed that they love it, I don't. As a documentary taken on it's own merits, it's not bad. But it's not exceptional either. Almost any night of the week you can sit on your own couch and watch a program of similar quality and production value on any one of hundreds of topics. This is just another one. It has a small handful of additional theater effects, but certainly nothing that transforms the viewing experience. In location terms, this attraction sits at the corner of boardwalk and park place - it's one of the most central, most desireable locale's in the entire park. That real estate should be put to better use than a film that some people find mildly amusing, and many outright dislike. But then we go back to the idea of moving the attraction to somewhere else. Why bother? How much of a run does disney expect to get out of an extremely simple and basic film attraction? Isn't this the very definition of a "placeholder"? It's had about six years already. It'll have a few more even if they announced new plans for the location tomorrow. I don't want to see it "plussed". I don't want to see it relocated. I don't want to see it at all.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>"That's because they're not TOUTED as major, centerpiece attractions." Neither are Golden Dreams or Seasons of the Vine.<<< I'll give you Seasons of the Vine, but as Gadzuxx so very well elucidated, Golden Dreams is front and center as a major attraction. The fact that it rarely has any kind of crowd lined up for it doesn't impact on how they have positioned the attraction, and the prominence it holds in the park. It's intended as a signature attraction. In fact, this single attraction encompasses (by intent) the whole supposed "theme" of the park. How you can claim it's on par with their expectations for a Shooting Gallery, is just bewildering. I know for a fact that's not what they intended.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>> GOLDEN DREAMS is a good long sit, in a dolled-up theater. A guest would expect it to be rather exceptional by its positioning, housing, theme and prominence. It's not. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about Innoventions...<<< An excellent example of blunders yet unrectified in Disneyland Park. The major difference is, that piece of real estate and "building technology" was created for a signature, centerpiece attraction, and was replaced by something that was constrained from the start by a half-baked budget.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Continuing the above thought about Innoventions - GOLDEN DREAMS was conceived and purposed as one of the signature attractions of the park, and both budget and creative resources kept it from achieving anything of exceptional quality.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Here is what Box Office Mojo thinks about Golden Dreams... <a href="http://www.boxofficemojo.com/features/?id=1995&pagenum=3&p=.htm" target="_blank">http://www.boxofficemojo.com/f eatures/?id=1995&pagenum=3&p=.htm</a> >>Golden Dreams A distortion of California's history hosted by Whoopi Goldberg as a mythical goddess. This 20-minute movie is multiculturalist tripe, crediting California's progress to any race, tribe or accident of nature. The film equates the Black Panthers at the 1968 Olympics and mentally retarded athletes with Walt Disney and other productive geniuses. A politically correct nightmare. <<
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Here is what Box Office Mojo thinks about Golden Dreams... >>> What do you think about it?
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Here's what I think of Box Office Mojo. "Boring and somewhat confusing layout, with a concentration on box office figures. Snore. Jammed with features about entertainment related ['Walt Disney' by Neal Gabler], and ridiculous polls ['When Will You See Charlotte's Web?'], it's a mish-mash of information that's hard to navigate.' - Jim in Merced, CA
