Originally Posted By WrongWay MackAttack, This thread sure has gone round and round. In your latest post to me, you said you still don't get what I meant when I said Jim missed the point. Here is what I originally said: <<I think Jim again misses the point in his latest "middle ground" article. The point that people jumped on about DCA was the Pier. How is that going to be fixed without taking it down?>> I'll have to go over some history to show what I meant. Oct 5, Jim Hill posted an article on how CA Adventure will be fixed. There was one line in there that set many people off, "DCA is pretty". On Oct 10, Jim wrote another article addressing how this one comment set many people off. (This is the thread to discuss that article). On Oct 11, he tried to calm the uproar over his Oct 10 column by discussing how he dislikes San Fran area, but it will get better. It was this article that prompted my post, so let's look at that again. <<I think Jim again misses the point in his latest "middle ground" article. The point that people jumped on about DCA was the Pier. How is that going to be fixed without taking it down?>> So, what I was trying to say was this. Talking about how Disney will fix San Fransisco does not adress people's concern with Paradise Pier. Most people speaking against Paradise Pier are basing their concern on the theme itself, not that there isn't enough to do or that the rides suck. I, and many others, think it is the "theme" itself that is the problem. We go to Disney because it provides theme parks. We can find amusement parks all over the country. Disney provides real quality theme parks. So, the idea of themeing an area to an amusement park (what we go to Disney to get away from), is dissatisfying. So, he says Disney will fix DCA, but doesn't address how Disney will fix the pier. Why talk about SanFran getting better when people are complaining about the pier? See, he missed the point. If Disney will fix DCA, and the complaints he was trying to calm were about Paradise Pier, then he should have tried to address how Disney will fix the pier, not San Fran. I think the only way Disney could fix DCA would to pick a different theme for the pier area. This would require taking it down and starting over. Anyway, that was the point that one post was intended to raise(people in this thread were mostly complaining about the pier, and discussing San Fran doesn't address these concerns), just in a lot fewer words. As far as why Dumbo is okay but Orage Stinger isn't. Well you really got me thinking on that one. My conclusion goes right back to my basic problem with the pier, the theme. Dumbo is okay because of the castle. I'm in Fantasyland, a child's ultimate playground, riding child like fantasy rides. The pier is themed to look like what I can find in dozens of places around the country. This makes the rides like any ride I can find in any of these places. See, it is the theme itself that I dislike.
Originally Posted By tooncity It's quit obvious to me that Disney Operatives kidnapped Jim. They induced some kind of mind-altering substance into his Mcfries at the new McDonalds in Frontierland. With the aid of some of Walt's old contacts at the FBI, they were able to trick him into writing such praise of DCA. It's obvious everybody can see the true.
Originally Posted By Doobie Jim Hill writes a lot of stuff I disagree with. But I do feel the need to (again) defend Jim Hill. While he has been very critical of the park, he's also praised it quite a bit. How could people forget his "eat crow" comment from his MousePlanet days after seeing the park for himself. Disagree with his opinions if you want, but I still stand by my opinion that Jim has always been pretty middle of the road on DCA. And depending on the situation, he'll talk about the stuff he likes or the stuff he doesn't. That doesn't mean he's changed his mind on the park as a whole. Now if you want to critisize him for other stuff ... (just kidding Jim Doobie.
Originally Posted By woody >>While he has been very critical of the park, he's also praised it quite a bit. So that's what he's doing!!! >>How could people forget his "eat crow" comment from his MousePlanet days after seeing the park for himself. He's still eating crow. What's going on here? I recommend the smoked turkey legs.
Originally Posted By woody Jim Hill wrote: >>Want an example of how seamless the story telling is in this particular part of Disney's California Adventure? On a really clear day, get on "Grizzly River Run" and -- as your raft chugs up the load hill -- keep your eyes fixed on Grizzly Peak. As your raft moves higher up that conveyor belt, notice that the snow capped San Gabriel Mountains will slowly rise up in the distance directly behind this bear-shaped mountain-top... I disagree. I can clearly see the Hilton and the Anaheim Convention Center on the conveyor belt. They need to add a tall wall or trees to conceal the ugly view of the buildings outside the non-berm. >>So you see, folks: They're trying. Braverman, Pressler and the Imagineers clearly recognize that DCA has problems. Problems that they probably should have seen coming, it's true. But that doesn't take away for the fact that they're already hard at work trying to fix these very same problems. So what's wrong with criticizing it now!!! >>Of course, were you to stand out here on The Middle Ground with me ... and not give in to the urge to be overly negative about the place (or overly positive, for that matter), you'd clearly see that Disney's California Adventure is already changing for the better. What's middle ground? After you get the fun of criticizing it and saying its the middle ground? Maybe you think its the middle ground because you say Pressler and Braverman are "trying". Okay, I dislike DCA but I know Disney is really trying. They're trying my patience.
Originally Posted By jonvn I have to agree with Doobie here. Jim says a lot of things that are harshly critical of Disney, and I don't often agree with them. Sometimes I do, though. He was extremely critical of DCA at one time as well. He changed his mind, because I think that he calls them exactly as he sees them, without much of an agenda behind his comments. He wrote an intelligent and articulate discussion regarding the history of Paradise Pier, and other aspects of DCA. It disassembled many of the tired half-truths that are constantly being spread about this section of the park, and by extension the rest of DCA. It is understandable that this would cause consternation amongst the more ardent attackers.
Originally Posted By reddon “Again, as you said, it comes down to money. That's what rules, and that's what has always got to be taken into account on these issues. Folks can scream and holler all they want, but Disney is not going to listen to a pack of hysterics who don't know anything about their business. They will do what is in their best interest, and do what they can to produce a product that the public finds acceptable.” In that case, why do people so worry about these “dweebs” “whining” about DCA at message boards? It really does not matter anyway, right? Just like the movie business, do you think the studio heads are saying “Let do some movies that Roger Ebert will like”? People that have enough interest about Disney and are willing to spend time reading about talking about it, these are not your average Disney customers. I don’t think it surprise anyone to find the extreme love/hate about Disney stuff here. Personally, I wouldn’t expect anything less.
Originally Posted By JHill_FAB_fan Middle Ground is in the eye of the beholder....It is popular today to view one's self as "middle ground." Middle ground people, moderates, sit in the middle of the road and eventually get run over....
Originally Posted By MiklCraw4d I think what we need to look for when an attraction or area comes out that is sub-par is the motivation behind it. Every company is going to have a dog every now and again be it movie or ride or whatever. If it's an honest mistake, fine. But when the whole mindset behind DCA's creation is flawed I question how optimistic we can be about the future. If Walt had put out a dog (Mickey Mouse Circus) it was ok to say fine, give him time, he'll work out the kinks. But when the whole mindset of the park was to do something cheap and to rake in as much cash as possible with minimum investment... well... I don't think we should get all rosy that Paul and Barry are suddenly going to work magic. I fault not the park but the entire corporate mindset that brought it about. Until that changes, I think we'll have little to really look forward to. mc PS. I hope it DOES change and we once more can look forward to amazing new experiences!
Originally Posted By cstephens JHill_FAB_fan > Middle ground people, moderates, sit in the middle of the road and eventually get run over.... So you're saying it's not possible or wise to like some stuff and not others? That you have to either love it or hate it? /cs
Originally Posted By jonvn "In that case, why do people so worry about these “dweebs” “whining” about DCA at message boards? It really does not matter anyway, right?" What makes you think anyone is? Other than having attempted discussions about the park interrupted and repeatedly tossed into a "DCA Sucks" thread, nothing any of the constant bashers have to say is going to make one iota of a difference. The only reason Jim mentioned it at all, I assume, is because it is simply an annoyance to read the constant hammering based on misconceptions and the lack of some people to base their opinions on something other than what you see on a certain website. Some people who are most vociferous in their complaints about DCA have never even been to the park. All this does is fill the air with poison regarding any attempt to have a pleasant discussion of the subject matter. Understand this: These people aren't going to be listened to. Not by Disney, and no longer by me. When someone calls DCA a Six Flags clone, or some other unbelievably exaggerated thing, it is a signal to anyone who has at least one foot on solid ground that the person who said such a thing is not going to give you worthwhile information. Consider what Disney SHOULD think of someone complaining for months on end about DCA who has never stepped foot in the park. Or someone claiming they know about the attendance problems or profitability when they have no access to the information, and just "eyeballs" it. These "opinions" are meaningless to Disney, and are pretty meaningless in general. But if it happens that these sorts of comments get posted enough times, to the point where they overwhelm any reasoned discussion of the issues, then the entire genre of communication becomes ignored, much like a lot of the internet is already, particularly regarding this subject matter. I rather doubt that Disney looks at DIG updates for operational guidelines, nor looks to this message board for ways to improve DCA. If they did, they'd be in more trouble than any of us would have thought. "People that have enough interest about Disney and are willing to spend time reading about talking about it, these are not your average Disney customers." That's true. And Disney wants to cater to their average customers. But people who make constant and repeated blistering comments that have no meaning behind them other than cheap shot bashing aren't even going to have their comments considered even as a Disney "fan." I do not think that the people who make the comments expect Disney to listen to them either, unless they are truly delusional. They're just a way for some people to get out some internal hostility, and it is obvious that they do not even care what is said to them, other than the words people use giving them fodder to make even more empty hostile comments. As for the love/hate comment, it is true, some people will have strong likes or dislikes regarding some things. Some people will feel frustration at what was not done right, and elation over things done very well. When it turns into negative extremism and endless cheap shots, though, that's when it goes from fandom to some other personal type of issue that has nothing to do with Disney. I don't like everything Disney has done. In fact, many of the things they have done are rather awful. It is my choice to either dwell on them or ignore them and concentrate on the things I enjoy. What do you think is better?
Originally Posted By JHill_FAB_fan CSTEPHENS - Actually my point is that Jim is not a middle ground guy. He has an opinion and he states it on a regular basis. The day Jim Hill is in the middle ground is the day he stops writing. Jim is a provocateur. He enjoys bringing up a topic and then exploiting the discussion for the purposes of developing a new column. (Before jumping all over me saying I'm anti Jim, note my tag line. and note I was a willing victim of his exploitation.) Additionally, my point is that very few people see themselves far outside the norm. Most view themselves as in the middle, the majority. In fact, few are in the middle. We're all extremists of one form or another. By even reading and writing on this discussion board we are viewed by many as Disney Dweebs and freaks. SO be it.
Originally Posted By reddon Man, that’s one long response. Welcome back, jonvn. “What makes you think anyone is? Other than having attempted discussions about the park interrupted and repeatedly tossed into a "DCA Sucks" thread, nothing any of the constant bashers have to say is going to make one iota of a difference.” If you are not concern about the whining, that’s cool. But I got the sense that quite a few people here do and give too much credit to the power of Al. "But if it happens that these sorts of comments get posted enough times, to the point where they overwhelm any reasoned discussion of the issues, then the entire genre of communication becomes ignored, much like a lot of the internet is already, particularly regarding this subject matter." This kind of problem is not unique to LP, happens to message boards everywhere. It all depends on how the board is being policed. I think Doobie is doing pretty good job. Personal attacks and inappropriate posts are deleted fairly quickly. MackAttack started a “Why I Like DCA” thread. I don’t see that get dragged into a “DCA sucks” debate.
Originally Posted By ifzorro well i think i am in the middle group because i love many parts of the park but also find some faults including the san francisco area and the very calm and quiet hollywood backlot (the real hollywood lots and streets are much more energized) Hope they have some streat entertainment added soon like in MGM studios in WDW The schedule for the hyperion show times is akward since all the shows end too lealry and leaves that area with very litle to see and do in the evenings but the show is leaving so it will be worse.
Originally Posted By GGGD You're wrong, JHill Fan. Jim *has* been a middle in the road guy. He's always been fair in pointing out both the positives and negatives of hotly debated arguments. And moderates don't sit in the middle of a road. They wade in a stream on a raft while the extermists on either side drown on either side of him/her. And I think it's rather presumptious of someone to tell others that they are "provacuters" or "entremists". If there is nothing I hate more, it's being labeled something I not. Sorry, to say, but most people are not exterimests. They don't just completely love something or completely hate something. And no, people would not think of us an extreme because we are posting on this board. Now if we threatened to kill someone because we didn't like their opinion...well then their attitude would change. And we're not talking about extremisn in regards to views or one behavior. We're talking about it in the context of one's opinion of a particular item or object. Big difference. Differentate between specific views and general outlooks. They'e not always the same thing.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
