Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<Not only that they changed the name of the place.>> Bu for legal reasons basically iirc!Didnt have a choce there. And DHS sucked too, but smply sucked waaaay less than DCA and was a 3rd gate vs 2nd.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt <<Yes, DL was a hit, but it had its share of growing pains during its early development.>> "While some may or may not appreciate this one fact, but Disneyland Park's original "bones" remain intact to this day." And DCA's don't? So far the only major structure that is being demolished is the Golden Dreams Theater. It looks like Buena Vista Street will mostly be a redressing of the existing buildings that were behind the murals.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Wow sorry how my posts are comin out here! But its because i'm postin on a phone and rarely post on the internet from it. Hope people can read hem!
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt I mean okay, I love going to DL, and it's really fun for me and my family. But for the most part, I'm okay with what the parks are like today. And when I'm not, if it comes to that, I'm going to move on." Admittedly it took me a while to get here, but I'm OK now with pretty much whatever they do. CC, remember that thread last year where someone went into a tangent on how the color of Mickey's coat on the Swings wasn't exactly the same as in the cartoon? Some people take their Disney park obsession too far.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Most peple feel it is!" Really? I would bet that most people don't care.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney ^^i mean Disney fans. Most average people still steer clear of DCA all these years to even know lol.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance Yes, Hans. I remember well. lol It's not even about being okay with everything and anything that they do. I mean, naturally most people will like some things and not like some others. And I can even understanding being sad about the park changing in a way that was negative to you. I can imagine having some of those feelings someday if I ever find the park unattractive as a vacation destination. And yes, this is a discussion forum where things Disney proposes should be, well, discussed. But, when everything coming out of someone's fingers onto the keyboard is overwhelmingly "Disney is now a shell of its former self, and sucks and can't compete with the new things being done in other theme parks everywhere" then you have to wonder why some people can't stop discussing that and move on to those other more wonderful things.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones When Tomorrowland was renovated, it was still Tomorrowland. The understanding was that someday Tomorrowland would be outdated anyway and would need to be renovated. In that sense, its renovation was always expected to happen simply because of the nature of what it is. At DCA, the entire entrance is not only being re-themed, it's being rebuilt. It's not an upgrade. It's not a new take on the same theme. It wasn't planned from day 1. It's a completely different idea and concept. It would be like tearing down Frontierland and building its in place Toontown. That's the unprecedented part. They are taking out Sunshine Plaza and putting in 1920s Los Angelesland. Overall, the entire concept of a theme park based on California has been toned down tremendously. Disneyland's Magic Kingdom motif was never threatened.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "Overall, the entire concept of a theme park based on California has been toned down tremendously. Disneyland's Magic Kingdom motif was never threatened. " To add, while Disney-MGM changed its name, the spirit of the park did not revert from a Hollywood studio/backlot thing to something else. Epcot may be focused more on characters and thrills than science, but Future World and World Showcase didn't go anywhere. Animal Kingdom saw the addition of Everest, which was perfectly in line with the exotic spirit of the park. Animal Kingdom had always focused on extinct, alive and mythical animals. Tokyo Disney added Tower of Terror, which could be seen in the original scale models. It has been said that Raging Spirits was a hasty addition, but it's one dinky little roller coaster and most importantly fits the theme of the park. But this was decided by a separate company so it's essentially irrelevant anyway. It would be ludicrous to compare any of these things to what is happening at DCA and come to the conclusion of, "DCA-style makeovers happen at all Disney parks."
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt It's not even about being okay with everything and anything that they do. I mean, naturally most people will like some things and not like some others." That's true. I guess what I mean is that I've come to terms with movie synergy in every corner, new attractions/additions that are out of context with the given theme, overcrowding, Duffy, and so forth and so on. These things used to bug me and now they don't so much. I suppose that as a fan I've lost enthusiasm about the parks. I'm sure I'll enjoy my next visit to DLR, but I would say that I'm technically no longer a fan of the place.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney ^^Agree, is pretty obvius how much they have changed the theme/tone and execution of he place. Example, has anyone read Eisners dedication speech of the place lately? it doesnt even sound like the same park! DL dedcation speech still sounds as revalvent 50+ years later. DCAs sound like its about a different park in 10 short years...because now it is!
Originally Posted By WorldDisney "To all who believe in the power of dreams... welcome! Disney's California Adventure opens its golden gates to you. Here we pay tribute to the dreamers of the past... the native people, explorers, immigrants, aviators, entrepreneurs and entertainers who built the Golden State. And we salute a new generation of dreamers who are creating the wonders of tomorrow... from the silver screen to the computer screen... from the fertile farmlands to the far reaches of space. Disney's California Adventure celebrates the richness and diversity of California... its land, its people, its spirit and, above all, the dreams that it continues to inspire." Michael D. Eisner Chairman and Chief Executive Officer The Walt Disney Company February 8, 2001" Uh huh, yeah...they need to change this ASAP!!!
Originally Posted By WorldDisney What more funny now is that DCA 2.0 is focused heavy on Walt Disney and his arrival to Calfornia and his name isnt even mentoned in that dedication speech lol. And its generic descriptions of people like explorers and immigrants whch WAS aknowleged in DCA 1.0 has completely been razed over n DCA 2.0 for Buzz and Ariel and tooneylands. Sure, just a few rides and new coat of paint but no major changes to the theme beyond that lol!
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>***Most kids freak out about characters way more than anything else. Nothing makes them happier than giving Goofy a high five or hugging Mickey*** Little X doesn't care about the characters all that much, I guess she's different from "most kids" as she much prefers the attractions (particularly Space Mountain and Splash). She has fun with the characters, but it's far from her favorite thing at Disneyland.<<< I never much cared for the characters as a kid myself, and although my kids enjoy them, they are far more interested in Big Thunder, or PotC or Phantom Manor. I think where the kids are really into the characters is wholly based around the parents shoving that aspect in the planning stages. Newbies don't know better because Disney no longer advertise their cool attractions. and then newer repeat visitors get into the character mantra. Also, the autograph books are evil and were really the genus of this behavioural system.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>You should accept what is presented because it's reality. If the reality is unacceptable to you, then that should be your cue to move on to find something you like better.<<< Would you move on from one of your kids if they started doing things you didn't approve of, or try to influence the course in the direction you would like? what about your community, or your country? I don't give up so easily. I didn't come to DL as a vacation as an adult. I grew up with it and it very much shaped who I am. I would love my children to have the same opportunity.
Originally Posted By Mr X In my case, the first visit I can remember (I went around my 4th B-Day and have a pic with Mickey to prove it, but I only remember bits and pieces), I enjoyed the characters as "part of the scenery". I was with a marching band group, and the Big Bad Wolf started chasing after some of our members which was a hoot. It was FAR more informal, and seemed a nice touch. Now it's just out of control and lame as far as I'm concerned.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Absolutely how i feel. then again, I also miss full service gas stations too.
Originally Posted By crapshoot <<DL dedcation speech still sounds as revalvent 50+ years later.>> Sort of, but all anyone hears is the opening line. The rest is a bit muddied; "...and here youth may savor the challenge and promise of the future." "Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams and the hard facts that have created America..." Again, a bit muddied. But even with that, it is still a source of inspiration.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance "That's true. I guess what I mean is that I've come to terms with movie synergy in every corner, new attractions/additions that are out of context with the given theme, overcrowding, Duffy, and so forth and so on. These things used to bug me and now they don't so much. I suppose that as a fan I've lost enthusiasm about the parks. I'm sure I'll enjoy my next visit to DLR, but I would say that I'm technically no longer a fan of the place." It doesn't bug me either. Not much anyway. Sometimes it does. But I don't let it interfere with the fun. If it does interfere with it someday, then I won't be going anymore. "I think where the kids are really into the characters is wholly based around the parents shoving that aspect in the planning stages. Newbies don't know better because Disney no longer advertise their cool attractions. and then newer repeat visitors get into the character mantra. Also, the autograph books are evil and were really the genus of this behavioural system." Oh, Dave, Dave, Dave. On the contrary, I do not plan character interactions in my vacations much. Rather than the meal or two I might book ahead of time. I don't relish the idea of standing in a long line to get a picture with Mickey for the 20th time. And, I often try to steer my kids away from an area I see a character with a long ling lingering. I don't like long lines. My kids love the rides too of course, but when they see a character, for them, all bets are over and they try to beeline straight for them. Either kids like them a lot of they don't. I'd wager to say a lot of them do. But if a kid doesn't like characters, (and you know them when you see them) there really isn't anything you can do to make them like it. You see parents trying to force the happy picture from their kids, and it just isn't happening.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <And it was first, so by definition, DCA's transformation can't be unprecedented. Nor was it or will it be the last. It's the model subsequent Disney-financed parks are also following. If they considered it such a failure, why did they open subsequent parks along the same model? Because, whether we like it or not, that's the way they do things now.>> <Agree to disagree! DHS is still the same park from openn other then the studio element which was lame.> That's like saying that Animal Kingdom would be the same if they kept the buildings and general look but took out all the animals. The "real studio" was the HEART of what MGM was supposed to be. Just because it never really worked doesn't mean it wasn't supposed to be that (as you yourself might say about DCA's CA theme). And the CA theme is in fact being strengthened in the coming additions, especially the 2012 additions. <But it didnt change its basic concept, or time periods or complete areas/lands like DCA is doing. > Sure it did. It added the whole TOT area, the whole Muppets area, the whole Honey area, the big Fantasmic arena... I don't know if you actually saw MGM in 1989 but there really wasn't much. there. People keep bashing and talking about how much they did or didn't like this about DCA, but that's not the point I'm making. It's that both the "build small and add later" model AND the "alter the theme as we need to" were both done to MGM before DCA - and something can't be unprecedented if there's a precedent. MGM got away with it much more, mostly because it was a 3rd gate rather than a 2nd, and because it opened pre-internet. But as you say, agree to disagree.
