Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>In my opinion, and maybe in my opinion only- I do not go to Disney parks for stage shows, and will only watch a parade if I must. I am not into theater, I'm into attractions. Why? Because no one does them like Disney. Pirates and Mansion still stand as the pinnacle of Imagineering accomplishments. Others can waste their time watching performers on a stage- not me. Maybe that is why people refer to DAK, DCA,HKDL, and the awful WDSP as half day parks.<<< What about imagineered shows like AA or CoP? I go for those and the pyro shows. Foamheads on a stage don't usually get my attention.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I just got photos of the parade floats through this week as they are still under construction (I'd hoped to get out to the fabricator but doesn't seem likely now). The parade will launch in January and the anniversary will run until December '11. Although it may seem odd that the anniversary is kicking off four months late it does make sense considering how popular Halloween and Christmas are now.>> It is a bit odd, but I can't complain since it's obvious they are constantly offering more entertainment at HKDL. I just worry about their ability to compete with Ocean Park with the current level of investment. It simply isn't going to be enough. <<I'll be at the park tomorrow night for Halloween itself - no idea what sort of crowds to expect!>> How was Halloween there? I was already out of HK for the holiday.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 ***I don't get the whole 'toony vibe thing except in Fantasyland (obviously) and Tomorrowland to a great extent*** <<But that's half the park!>> Yeah. And I'd simply say 'have you been to MK recently?' Toons are what Disney parks are all about in the new Walmarted reality. <<As I wrote, Adventureland is more muted, somewhat, but still sort of conforms to the other two lands.>> I find A-land to be very unique and beautiful. <<And there you have the whole freakin place, sans main street which is an Anaheim facsimile.>> Of course it is ... Disney pulled as many prior designs and concepts to make the park as cheaply as possible. Doesn't make it bad. <<How you can NOT find the place overtly homogenous is beyond me.>> I find many elements similar to other parks, but as a whole, I don't find all the lands feel like each other ... certainly no more so than MK.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Of course it is ... Disney pulled as many prior designs and concepts to make the park as cheaply as possible. Doesn't make it bad.<<< Errr... To me, it kinda does. Cheapens both experiences. Why clone buildings in the parks? It makes the experience of going to one park similar to going to another one. Uniqueness is lost. I can understand the need for there to be certain similarities in rides and architecture, but carbon copies just brings BOTH parks involved, down. I mean, Walt's FIRST, ORIGINAL Castle.... is also sitting in HK. That's just wrong. LOL.
Originally Posted By leemac <<How was Halloween there?>> It was a fun night. A lot of people went all out. There are still some bars/stores here in Shanghai that are decorated for Halloween - I don't think they know the date of the holiday!
Originally Posted By leemac <<Why clone buildings in the parks? It makes the experience of going to one park similar to going to another one. Uniqueness is lost. >> Uniqueness isn't a marketable trait when you have an entirely heterogeneous target audience. The number of folks that have visited both HKDL and DL is tiny - and the VAST majority would have gone just to say they have been (i.e. the hardcore fans) so it would have made no difference whether the Main Street was entirely new or not. HKDL's Main Street isn't a carbon copy of DL's current version - it is a carbon copy of the Main Street that Walt wanted to build - there are elements in HKDL's version that never made it to DL in '55 as they ran out of construction time.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer ^ Still. It't the principle, here. Cloning isn't creativity, and Disney can do better than that. Castle's, especially. They represent the whole resort, usually. Why is Tokyo's "Icon" the same as WDW's? Feels cheap.
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///Why is Tokyo's "Icon" the same as WDW's?/// Because: (1)replicating is cheaper to build (2)MK's castle was viewed as a "winner" so why take a chance doing something different/original (3)Tokyo entertains a homogeneous(solid Japanese crowds, very few foreigners) guest population who wouldn't typically visit WDW. And even if Japanese would have visted WDW in droves they likely would accept the same castle anyway for they 'eat up' US cultural iconic features like M. Jackson, baseball, Disney, Elvis, Harleys & peace signs(originally a Brit design).
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///Why is Tokyo's "Icon" the same as WDW's? Feels cheap./// But Tokyo does have by far the coolest park icon ever with the "erupting" Mt. Prometheus. And their Aquasphere is worthy too.
Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1 ">>>Of course it is ... Disney pulled as many prior designs and concepts to make the park as cheaply as possible. Doesn't make it bad.<<< Errr... To me, it kinda does. Cheapens both experiences. Why clone buildings in the parks? It makes the experience of going to one park similar to going to another one. Uniqueness is lost. I can understand the need for there to be certain similarities in rides and architecture, but carbon copies just brings BOTH parks involved, down." I agree!!! I had a friend here in Perth who wanted to go on a holiday with me to HKDL when it first opened. He has only ever been to DL in Anaheim whereas I have been to DL, DCA, USH, MK, Epcot, MGM, DAK, SW, USF, IOA, KSC, TDL and TDS(along with many coaster parks in the US). When I read that it was a half day park and people were VERY disappointed I told him, "I MIGHT think about going when they actually finish the damned place!" I've already BEEN to DL - I don't need to fly to some Asian country to see a half built clone! "I mean, Walt's FIRST, ORIGINAL Castle.... is also sitting in HK. That's just wrong." I completely agree. It IS wrong - for MANY reasons.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>(2)MK's castle was viewed as a "winner" so why take a chance doing something different/original<<< Because that's what Disney DOES. It says a terrible thing about their philosophy and creativity when they can't even build a new castle.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORGOCH: Well, I been tellin' 'em fer YEARS ta go an build the ol' Horny King's Castle at the next Dizzy theme park they gets the itch ta make. But nobody listens ta me!!
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>ORGOCH: Well, I been tellin' 'em fer YEARS ta go an build the ol' Horny King's Castle at the next Dizzy theme park they gets the itch ta make. But nobody listens ta me!!<<< In a perfect world the FLE would have a Villains Miniland. And that, or Malificent's Castle would be the perfect icon/weenie for it.
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///It says a terrible thing about their philosophy and creativity when they can't even build a new castle./// Yep, and to go even further I wish that every park in the Disney chain were completely different in its overall theme and that no attraction was ever duplicated(unless that attraction was given huge pluses like Phantom Manor, Small World, Thunder Mnt and Pirates in Paris or ToT and Indiana Jones in Tokyo).
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer Well...I would not go THAT far,things like HM and POTC are staples. But I think that facades, and some aspects of the show should be different.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 well if one if going to hope and wish -let's make everything unique and more expensive because money doesn't mater I guess. My guess is when parks like HK open they get more attractions ( I know they were not overloaded to begin with) than you normally would by savings design costs. I could be talked into a different castle for each park as a center icon, but really, after that what % of their guests go to even more than 1 park ( I'll bet they know that number) - Even in the same country ( US) the % of people that go to bpth DL and WDW is likely not overwhelming. Some tweaks on the facades to reflect where they are- of course, but the rides themselves- I don't think so. I want them to be creative with the NEW items they roll out- absolutely, but if they clone or semi clone it somewhere else it is not laziness IMHO, but good business sense. I know only a handful of people outside of my LP friends that have been to a Disney park outside the US. And usually those are not trips to Disney alone- but tacking a day or so at DLP onto a Euro trip etc.
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///it is not laziness IMHO, but good business sense./// Can't it be both? Why 'yes' Disney can be both gutless/lazy/unoriginal AND concurrently fiscally responsible---- it's not necessarily one or the other.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>well if one if going to hope and wish -let's make everything unique and more expensive because money doesn't mater I guess. My guess is when parks like HK open they get more attractions ( I know they were not overloaded to begin with) than you normally would by savings design costs. I could be talked into a different castle for each park as a center icon, but really, after that what % of their guests go to even more than 1 park ( I'll bet they know that number) - Even in the same country ( US) the % of people that go to bpth DL and WDW is likely not overwhelming.<<< OK, so in the business it makes sense. But in the creative sense? And in the sense of Disney's legacy? It's terrible. They need to be able to balance between the both. As of late, Disney only cares about their profits, not the means to which they derive those profits. And for a company such as Disney, where the means of derive profit is what they actively do and produce with the public, that's a large problem...
Originally Posted By vbdad55 ///it is not laziness IMHO, but good business sense./// Can't it be both? Why 'yes' Disney can be both gutless/lazy/unoriginal AND concurrently fiscally responsible---- it's not necessarily one or the other - you want every single atraction to be unique and different or else it's lazy and gutless ? Seems little room for compromise- so under your rules NO it can not be both - they would either be fiscally irresponsible to their stockholders - or drunken sailors. Really asking the impossible- again this is a real xorporation, not run on pixie dust but shareholders investments. And the ROI for that would be what ? For the much less than 1% of the visitors that would travel to each park to see the 'different ' attractions ? Having a different castle - sure. Tweaks on facades etc. sure- complete unqiue attractions everywhere - completely unrealistic.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 But in the creative sense? And in the sense of Disney's legacy? It's terrible. They need to be able to balance between the both. As of late, Disney only cares about their profits, not the means to which they derive those profits. And for a company such as Disney, where the means of derive profit is what they actively do and produce with the public, that's a large problem... ------------------ if they do what barboy is asking - and to a lesser extent what you want then there would be no legacy left to protect - they would be International Harvester / Pan Am or anyone else you want to choose that was tops once and gone for the most part now. I agree with your castle wish because I view that as the park icon - and yes I think for that one attraction make it different. I also agree with facade treatments and live entertainment differences. But to pay design companies - ( ride wise )- or spend untold millions in house to design every single thing completely different- that would be insane. --let me ask you this- when they decided to build the MK did they design everything completely differently ? No...who , alhtough he did not get to see the finished product directed those efforts up front? Or were they untrue to their legacy also ? Did they try and invent a new way of animating for 'every' picture they did ? I agree that new attractions should be unique and top quality when released- that is the legacy I want to see them follow. But if they come up with a killer e ticket and install it in 3 parks- that is hardly lazy or untrue to their legacy. I also disagree on their focus on profit ONLY. In these economic times if you do not watch your dollars and sense you are stupid - not cheap. Are the new cruise ships coming out complete with some unqiue new things ? Are they not even larger than the current fleet ? Are they not almost completely re doing DCA in the midst of the worst recession of your lifetime ? seriously, after you have some business experience and run something, a company, a division something, you may understand better. You are asking them to be something they cannot be 100% of the time and still survive. Are you a stockholder ? A long time stockholder ? How has that been the last 10 years ? Are they turning record profits and staching them away ? No.
