Originally Posted By mawnck >>I thought Walt created his park so families could enjoy doing something together, not just the parents watching the kids have fun, but letting the adults recapture the fun they has as a kid.<< Here's what I'm talking about. Snopes ought to have a page for things like this. This story (Walt at the park watching his daughters on the merry go round and wondering why they didn't build a park that adults could enjoy with their kids) was obviously invented by the Disney PR flacks. It contradicts everything we know about the genesis of Disneyland, which was originally intended to be a studio tour sort of thing in Burbank. And Disneyland has a merry go round. >>Guy's been dead for half a century. Let him rest in peace. You sure don't know what he would've wanted.<< Whatever it was, the quotes he gave about it would've sounded REALLY good. ;-)
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>What kind of park do you think Roy would have made, without Walt?<<< Walt Disney World?!?!? >>>(Walt at the park watching his daughters on the merry go round and wondering why they didn't build a park that adults could enjoy with their kids) was obviously invented by the Disney PR flacks.<<< If you take that phrase word for word literally, yea. However, there is another interpretation. What he meant was a park the didn't exclusively cater to children. A park that could be "enjoyed" by every member of the family either, individually or side by side. That is why there was a "merry-go-round" in DL as well as things that the parents would be comfortable riding on too. Besides there is film of Walt saying that himself. I don't know him as well as some of you folks pretend to, but he never struck me as a man that let others put specific words in his mouth particularly if they weren't true and that personal.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA I think mawnck"s cynical, PR department version of Walt Disney is inaccurate.
Originally Posted By crapshoot << but he never struck me as a man that let others put specific words in his mouth particularly if they weren't true and that personal.>> Bingo! Ya'll need to read In Service to the Mouse, Jack Lindquist to get a quick understanding of what it was like to work FOR Walt from a the perspective of a Disneyland marketing employee.
Originally Posted By phruby What's wrong with the Merry-go-round? Why do people keep bashing it. I'm an adult and I love to ride the Merry-go-round. They should never take out the Merry-go-round. It's a Disneyland original and it defines Disneyland just like the Peoplemover and the subs. I need to start a save Merry-go-round thread.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I think mawnck"s cynical, PR department version of Walt Disney is inaccurate.<< I guess I don't see what's cynical about it, especially given his nuanced approach. Does anyone doubt Walt Disney wanted to make money? Does anyone doubt he was an entrepreneur? That Walt knew how to make a quality product that had wide appeal was a great talent of his. And on the occasion when his products didn't do as well (Pinocchio) it wasn't because he was a charitable artist who wanted to inspire regardless of the cost. Walt was usually looking ahead to the next thing. He wasn't the sentimentalist people regard him as.
Originally Posted By crapshoot <<nd on the occasion when his products didn't do as well (Pinocchio) it wasn't because he was a charitable artist who wanted to inspire regardless of the cost.>> "This was primarily due to the fact that World War II and its aftermath had cut off the European and Asian markets overseas, and hindered the international success of Pinocchio and other Disney releases during the early and mid-1940s."
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Nuanced.... Right<< From mawnck's posts: >This is not a black-and-white either-or situation....< >you do not have to **maximize** profits at the expense of quality, or of enjoying what you do....< >Walt was driven by a number of different things, among them the desire to create art....< I don't see cynicism in his posts. Just reality. I guess I just don't see why saying Walt Disney wanted to make money, and therefore created exceptional entertainment that had broad appeal, is some kind of insult to his memory. Quite the opposite, it seems like a great compliment to the man.
Originally Posted By a1stav From mawnck's posts: "His "dream" was to make a bungload of money off of a theme park. To think otherwise is extremely naive."
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Walt gave the go-ahead to rip up a Tomorrowland that wasn't working. He took out 14 attractions in the decade between park opening and the big redo in the mid-1960s. He'd see the empty Peoplemover tracks, the unused motor boat lagoon, the terribly underutilized Innoventions building, and the 1950s technology still in use on the Autopia and want something more. I'm sure of that. And if someone showed him Mysterious Island or the plans for Discovery Bay and how it could fit on that same footprint, what do you think his reaction would be? "Oh, that looks nice, but I really want to keep this diesel submarine and those gas-powered cars."
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>I guess I just don't see why saying Walt Disney wanted to make money, and therefore created exceptional entertainment that had broad appeal, is some kind of insult to his memory. Quite the opposite, it seems like a great compliment to the man.<<< Never said he didn't want to make money. He wasn't stupid and probably didn't believe in Pixie Dust either. What I took issue with was the statement that "Walt built the Parks to make a Bungload of money". No doubt he wanted them to be successful, but to him, according to everything I read, money was the means to achieve his goals and create what he wanted created. Not the other way around. The Parks made money, but not before an even larger "bungload" of money was risked to do so. If you are motivated strictly to make money you don't risk it all for a dream. That is just a pleasant side effect. There is a real difference between building Parks to make money and making money to build Parks when it comes to motivation. BTW, in spite of using it a couple of times myself...what exactly is a bungload anyway?
Originally Posted By a1stav "I really want to keep this diesel submarine" It is powered by electricity now. In fact it uses inductive charging (very 21st. century). I think he would love the pulsing of his old submarine voyage attraction. The concept of an "underwater voyage" is not obsolete but rather the technology used to do it. The not quite 5 year old Submarine Voyage is a remarkable mixture of a vintage Disneyland adventure and modern technology. Autopia on the other hand, that can go without pause.
Originally Posted By a1stav "BTW, in spite of using it a couple of times myself...what exactly is a bungload anyway? " A "bungload" is the metric measurement ranging between a lot and a "crapton".
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Never said he didn't want to make money. He wasn't stupid and probably didn't believe in Pixie Dust either. What I took issue with was the statement that "Walt built the Parks to make a Bungload of money". No doubt he wanted them to be successful, but to him, according to everything I read, money was the means to achieve his goals and create what he wanted created. Not the other way around. The Parks made money, but not before an even larger "bungload" of money was risked to do so. If you are motivated strictly to make money you don't risk it all for a dream. That is just a pleasant side effect. There is a real difference between building Parks to make money and making money to build Parks when it comes to motivation.>> From what I've read Walt consistently lost money on his projects because he constantly overspent in his pursuit of perfection. Had Roy not been around to "save" him, he would have probably died bankrupt.
Originally Posted By bravebrother Walt was very proud of his subs! He didnt care about the high cost of running the attraction, as long as people were enjoying them!
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb I guess my problem with the post that started all this is treating Walt Disney like the second coming. He was a creative genius who built an entertainment company that continues to delight more than 45 years after his death. Amazing, but hardly worthy of the near deification some credit to his memory. 'What would Walt say?" I don't know, and although it would be nice to remember he wanted to put out a quality product and move forward with that in mind, it hardly matters what he would say or think on the particulars of any given project. Does anyone care what Walter Knott would think of the mega coasters in his charming little theme park? That question is just as valid, but no one is drooling over his memory and attributing Messianic qualities to it.
Originally Posted By a1stav "Does anyone care what Walter Knott would think of the mega coasters in his charming little theme park?" Lot's of people do, just read any posts about Knott's and you find all kinds of complaining about how Knott's has lost it's charm and how Walter Knott would not have intended his park to go the route taken by Cedar Fair. There is also tons of talk about how Matt Ouimet will bring a renascence to Knott's the same way he did with Disneyland, ironically capping his success with the revitalised Submarine Voyage. <a href="http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/04/01/New-Cedar-Fair-CEO-has-fresh-outlook-on-fun.html" target="_blank">http://www.toledoblade.com/loc...fun.html</a>
