Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney "To answer LuvDatDisney (post #37): I have a lot of Disney World experience, though it's definitely tapered off over the past decade. As a kid, we went on annual trips maybe sixteen years in a row (1972-1988). Since 1990, I've only been perhaps four times." Thanks for the answers. I always feel it's important to find out where someone is coming from. Helps to understand their opinions when you know what they are basing them on. "I have heard a lot of grousing over the past couple years concerning upkeep and cleanliness at Disney World. I don't have any personal experience to back that up; it could very well be true." I'm in the parks monthly. It is true. "I didn't really touch on the upkeep issues because those things wax and wane over the years. Disneyland has been ripped on this issue more than any of the parks over the past ten years and it's only in the past nine months that fans have felt satisfied with the maintenance level. If Disneyland's maintenance is better now, it's very possible the situation might be reversed in a decade. Because it's a transient issue (though not an unimportant one)--and because I don't go often enough to really know--I left it out of my comparison." Fair enough. But it's something some of us passionately believe in. Since you visted WDW in the 70s and 80s, I'm sure if you spent a decent amount of time there now on a regular basis (or even once a year) you'd notice the same things. "Comparing park-to-park, I'd likely pick Disneyland as superior primarily because it has so many more attractions. (At Disney World, investment that would have otherwise gone into the Magic Kingdom has been put into the newer parks." That's so true. And as a MK-luver, I got some issues with that. Mission Space may be a great ride (although just a decent attraction because that's all it is, a quikee thrill that is out of this world ... hey, that'd make a good marketing campaign!), but adding it to Epcot does nothing for the MK. Same as adding EE to DAK. WDW is based upon the idea that bigger is better. Get tired or bored? Parkhop. That is completely opposed to the 70s and 80s era of exceeding guest expectations. "That same lack of investment is a more recent phenomenon at Disneyland: over the past seven or eight years, most of the investment has gone into California Adventure and the "resort" infrastructure. But in those intervening years, Disneyland certainly built up a larger suite of attractions than the Magic Kingdom.) As I tried to illustrate in the article, I don't give a lot of points to Disneyland for "nostalgia" or being "Walt's park," because I personally feel a lot more nostalgia when I visit Disney World; it's simply what you're used to. My point with the article is to make the case that Disney World's Magic Kingdom isn't just a poor man's Disneyland, which is the reputation I feel it gets painted with on the net far too often. It features many things Disneyland lacks, and in fact is--I think--superior in many respects." Oh, I agree. On many things. The two I previously mentioned to start, the fact you can dine in the castle (heck the fact you can get a full service meal at numerous eateries), the fact it has Pooh AND ALSO the Country Bears, the CoP (one of the greatest Disney attractions ever, IMHO), the Hall of Presidents (although having Clinton and Bush talk has ruined it for me), the huge, wide walkways, the Mansion sitting atop the bluff, etc ... That said, I find DL to be a far superior park if I were to compare them. And it certainly attempts (and succeeds more often than not) in living up to Walt's Legacy. WDW's MK used to do that, but not so much now. And Greg, you still need to visit more often. WDW, as a whole, is GREAT!!!
Originally Posted By LadyandtheTramp Having lived approximately one hour's drive from both DL and WDW during our lifetime (DL 1995-2001, WDW now), and thus having seen both quite frequently, the bottom line opinion would be: Ta Da They are apples and oranges. The MK at DL is much more intimate and beautiful, and gives a feeling of closeness. The MK at WDW is huge, and tends to overwhelm. But you can turn that around, and complain that DL MK is too constricted, and you've always bumping into someone or getting ankles battered by strollers, while the WDW MK is roomy and you can walk unimpeded. Depends on your perspective. But WDW is a resort, whereas DL is a resort wanna-be. Sorry, but you can spend a week at WDW without duplicating doing anything - try to do that at DL, and you'll be twiddling your thumbs by day 4. To me, that's the big difference, and why comparisons between the two are unfair. (Luckily, we've also been to TDL and DLP, and while they each have respective charms and drawbacks [we can trash DLP Studios all we want but that's shooting fish in a barrel, TDS is fantastic] WDW is the first park we went to and is still the overall favorite.)
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I agree with the apples and oranges statement....DL vs. WDW. But I disagree with the fact that Southern California can't be a 1 week vacation destination.... No it's not all Disney but that has never stopped me in my life. I lived in newport Beach for a while - and made frequent trips to DL -- but there is a lot else there to do than DL --( heresy I know) - and I dare say mulitple times things to do compared to the Orlando area ---- I grew up on DL because we had relatives nearby -- and the yearly visit always included one day with my aunt and uncle who had more money that we did- at DL. I have been to DL maybe 10 times since getting married 28 years ago -- vs. over 40 trips to WDW. I like each for what they bring to the table -- and each have their limitations. I think DL is the quintessential theme park -- especially when taken care of as it is now....does that make it better ? hard to say..but it does get points from me for being the first -- and there is a different feeling there than at MK -- not sure as to why. Maybe because more CM's there are really into the whole experience maybe more -- as they don;t have to try and hire 50,000 of them like WDW. I'll take either --
Originally Posted By mickey_ring <<-- but there is a lot else there to do than DL --( heresy I know) - and I dare say mulitple times things to do compared to the Orlando area ---->> There's the WDW long-term business model right there! Quietly buy up a mess of reasonably remote land, build a bunch of stuff on it so the tourists (and their $) won't have a reason to wander off that property. No racks of brochures for other places anywhere in sight, not even fly-by banners in WDW airspace no more. (Maybe that has changed ?) Now think of the non-WDW attractions... Cypress Gardens tanked and needed a buyer, Splendid China auctioned off, Sea World drifted along until the Bud Man bought 'em (yes,dolphin shows and free beer do have merit), Church Street Station has gone under several times since the 80s(cool place, odd location) and Universal always seemed like a "me too" copycat of WDW. Even the dinner/show joints along 192 come and go. WDW retains its visitors. WDW looks too corporate? Sure! A corporation planned it to generate m-o-n-e-y to keep the corporation going! How's that for an editorial? Now I need a nap.
Originally Posted By fkurucz ^^^ WD Co could buy out the destroyed parts of New Orleans, fill it in and build another mega park like WDW. Of course, there probably isn't a large enough market for a NO WDW, plus it would cannibalize WDW. Still, when you think about it, that land is pretty much worthless, and NO is a tourism based economy. They might even get redevelopment grants from the feds (a little corporate welfare!) Of course, they would have to build it right so it could withstand the next Katrina. Anyway, that's my crazy thought of the day.
Originally Posted By trailsend I have never been to DL, but have made 35 trips to WDW since '81. Needless to say, what Greg pointed out about special places in WDW I wholeheartedly agree. My children grew up going to WDW. As each new park opened, we were there. As WDW grew, we grew as well. Some favorite things and places are gone, but others have replaced them. We love it all. But that doesn't take anything away from DL. I plan to get to DL at some point. But not to compare the two; DL should always be special because it was Walt's first dream put into reality. We have the DVD of the opening day and love to watch it. As lovers of the great imagination of Walt Disney that came to life, we should stop and consider how the Disney atmosphere is available to us in many places ~ and internationally as well. I believe, no, I KNOW, if I am able to get to all the Disney parks in my life, I will love them all!
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I KNOW, if I am able to get to all the Disney parks in my life, I will love them all! < I would think that is a safe bet......we are all bought in here to the magic
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy I am reminded of a quote from Imagineer Tony Baxter. Tony grew up and lives on the west coast, and has had a personal hand in developing attractions for both DL and WDW. (and the other parks) He says DL is "magical." And WDW/MK is "spectacle."
Originally Posted By DLFAN79 ""He says DL is "magical." And WDW/MK is "spectacle.""" HA! He said that for a special on teh Travel Channel MADE FOR DIsney. So WHAT ELSE us he gonna say. EVERY PROJECT he has done has been at DL.
Originally Posted By macnak81 This is what makes the parks so special for everyone. You can find special visual and visceral treats around every corner in every park. I luv them all in their unique way. Although I feel a little cheated in WDW's Fantasyland, Especially when you get road blocked by all the strollers jammed out front of the big box they call A Small World. Also each separate gated park in itself is another whole world that appears to be extensions of original lands in Disneyland. Adventure land/Animal Kingdom, Tomorrow land /Epcot,Well MGM, just a mishmash of things that couldn't fit anywhere else. But all an outgrowth of Walts original statement " that as long as their is imagination Disneyland will never be finished.....".it has spread beyond the berms and across continents and oceans. What an imagination!
Originally Posted By HomeOfFutureLiving The Disney World Fantasyland doesn't seem well-regarded, and admittedly I've never thought that there was much special to it. But in refreshing my memory it actually looks pretty cool. <a href="http://www.bigbrian-nc.com/0100cont/11102-800.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.bigbrian-nc.com/010 0cont/11102-800.jpg</a> Yeah, I know that there's no DL-style Small World facade, but that photo's really pretty impressive. Another photo I saw of the newly-renovated Pinocchio Village Haus looked as nice as anything I've seen in any other Fantasyland. Is WDW getting the short end of the stick? What's up?
Originally Posted By macnak81 Thanks for the wonderful picture of the original Fantasyland. It was a gorgeous view from the skyway loading area. But that to alas is gone. We don't even have a chance to walk up there for a little snack or view....hmmmmmmmmm.And the photo reminds me that originally the imagineers thought the park would be attended my mostly seniors from Florida and designed the park with less E tickets and more parklike attractions like the Sawn Boats. So I guess after thinking about it, that might be another reason why Fantasyland is CrammedinLand.
Originally Posted By Blackie Pueblo That old picture of Fantasy Land is amazing. It looks so different... when really not much has changed. Well... except... I really miss the skyway. Blackie Pueblo
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> "He says DL is "magical." And WDW/MK is "spectacle."" << >> HA! He said that for a special on the Travel Channel MADE FOR DIsney. So WHAT ELSE us he gonna say? << I have no doubt Tony said that on a Travel Channel / Disney program. But why does that make it untrue? You would prefer to believe that the Travel Channel told Tony "Here, just say this!" Isn't it possible that it's something that Tony actually said on his own, and he actually means it, and the Travel Channel simply caught it on film during an interview? Tony also made this quote at the NFFC convention in July, 2004. Now, does he actually mean it? Or is he being politically correct and answering carefully? Does he really prefer one park over the other? I've had the chance to meet and visit some with Tony over the years. I really don't know him well, and I'd hesitate to put words in his mouth. But personally, I think he really likes both parks for what they offer, and the way they offer it. But I also think he deep down has a special place for the original Disneyland. It's where he grew up. >> EVERY PROJECT he has done has been at DL. << Tony has designed many things on both coasts.
