Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> It's not just great rockwork. It's themed specifically to the Sierras, and there's also the mill (or whatever it is I don't go often) at the beginning. << There are also pine trees and water whooshing through river-like canals, and the blue sky above, which are truly marvelous themeing. It's another example of how Disney exceeds the vistor's expectations.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Put enough of them in and everyone will see 'em. Put in a backwoods cabin with an old mountaineer sitting on the porch cleaning his traps or rewinding his fishing reel. Put some animals into natural settings. The mining town that gets washed away in WDW's BTMRR goes by incredibly quickly, but it adds immeasurably to the quality and the repeatability of the attraction.>> Yep. The details are what make Disney, Disney. While I certainly feel that GRR is a decent ride with some nice theming/setting ... adding stuff is never bad. That's where the whole term 'plussing' came from back in that old guy who they trot out to shill timeshares now ... uhm what's his name? ... oh yeah. Walt. That's what they did in his day and after. PoC and Mansion are great examples of terrific attractions that are always plussed every few years. Even small things add a lot. <<The only reason to ride GRR for me is if it's a hot day and I want to get wet. I'd love to see more Disney type stuff there. But I'm not losing any sleep over it - there are many many areas of DCA that need much more immediate help.>> Agreed on all counts. Which, BTW, makes Jim Hill's column today a bit weird (aren't they all?) in his supposed ideas for that area. Or part of it and the winery.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<Make sure to reserve enough passes on the bus headed to Abilene.>> You're an idiot.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss More blah blah blah from you. Everyone here presents thoughtful opinions. All you do is say that everyone has no taste. I stand by my words: you're an idiot.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 why do I feel Disneywatcher is one of those sad, delusional people who believes the old parking lot was superior to DCA?
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> All you do is say that everyone has no taste. I stand by my words: you're an idiot. << I didn't say anything about taste. I said something in regards to the following words you expressed regarding the DisCo: >> Nothing that TWDC has ever created has made me feel patronized or insulted, and I honestly don't think they ever go in thinking, "As long as we slap the Disney name on it they will come." << And I'll stand by my words again: Make sure to book enough seats on the bus that's headed to Abilene.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> All you do is say that everyone has no taste. I stand by my words: you're an idiot. << I didn't say anything about taste. I said something in regards to the following words you expressed regarding the DisCo: >> Nothing that TWDC has ever created has made me feel patronized or insulted, and I honestly don't think they ever go in thinking, "As long as we slap the Disney name on it they will come." << And I'll stand by my words again: Make sure to book enough seats on the bus that's headed to Abilene.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Okay, so you say two things: everyone has no taste, and everyone is a stooge who only follows orders. I have no respect for someone who has no respect for anyone else. Spirit has you pegged; you're sad and delusional.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> why do I feel Disneywatcher is one of those sad, delusional people who believes the old parking lot was superior to DCA? << In regards to your assumption, Spirit of 74, you shouldn't trust the way you "feel" (in other words, your assumption is wrong).
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> I have no respect for someone who has no respect for anyone else. << I suspect if you truly believed my comment didn't apply to you and was 100% inaccurate, you'd laugh it off and think, hmm, that description is so far from the truth that it certainly is something I can't get defensive about or insulted by.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> And your assumtions are always right about everyone else. << To be honest, the last time I visited LP's board, I thought maybe I was being a bit unfair towards you regarding the so-called Abilene Paradox. Then tonight I came across the post where you stated the following... >> Nothing that TWDC has ever created has made me feel patronized or insulted, and I honestly don't think they ever go in thinking, "As long as we slap the Disney name on it they will come." << ...and I found myself saying, oh, my, I may have pegged you more accurately from the beginning than I thought. In your defense, trekkeruss, I at least don't believe I've ever seen you claim that DCA couldn't have been made better because its budget was too modest or DisCo shareholders (and/or executives) were too obsessed with the bottom line.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 >> why do I feel Disneywatcher is one of those sad, delusional people who believes the old parking lot was superior to DCA? << <<In regards to your assumption, Spirit of 74, you shouldn't trust the way you "feel" (in other words, your assumption is wrong).>> I'm glad to hear that. But it does seem your whole purpose in this thread is just to bash DCA and the folks who enjoy it. I'd be one of them. Although I enjoyed it more in 2001 when it least was coherent and true to its theme than now. I would never argue it wasn't flawed since Day 1 due to bad creative and financial decisions made before they even started digging up the parking lot. I also will say it was categorically mismanaged from TDA from pre-opening until 2004 when there was finally a realization that something needed to be done to correct fundamental deficiencies. That said, right now, I still find DCA superior to Disney-MGM (soon to be Hollywood) Studios and Disney Studios Paris, and I'm an APer at all three resorts so I'm quite familar with the offerings. The Florida park was wonderful at opening and has since been watered down to such an extent that a tacky hat/pin stand is its most prominent feature. The Paris park? Just go to that three-hour place (which does have 3-4 quality attractions and absolutely nothing else) and DCA looks like the greatest park ever built. The biggest mistake of DCA is that it was built as a cheap third gate when Disney should have built a higher-caliber second gate. Still, DCA was a HUGE success in one very important area that you never see brought up in these type of discussions ... it paved the way for DD and the GC, but even more, it allowed for the urban redevelopment of the whole resort zone. Without DCA, I can honestly wonder how viable DL would have remained as that area was heading straight to the cesspool. So you may not like DCA, that's cool. But others do (to whatever extent) and some of us are wise enough to look beyond the park and see all the good that it has brought to Anaheim. That's the reality that keeps getting totally obscured in the hyberbole.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I do not feel patronized or insulted is because it's a theme park. Anyone who feels patronized or insulted by an inanimate object is not objective, IMO. I do not think anyone at Disney has ever thought "Let's slap the Disney name on it; that will be good enough." I do think some of those in charge did not understand what the Disney product is all about. That former is malevolent; the latter is ignorance.
Originally Posted By ChurroMonster I wonder if a drunk disneywatcher is any fun because the sober disneywatcher is a real drag. Can I buy you a drink bro? Or two?
Originally Posted By jonvn There are simply a number of very disturbed people online. It's easy to get caught up in talking to them, but really, you're not talking to a person you're talking to a mental illness. I think if someone can do nothing but say the same things repeatedly for several years running, and little else, that indicates something really is bad wrong. It's hard to avoid getting involved, though. I do it all the time myself. Anyway... "That's where the whole term 'plussing' came from " You also have to think about that. What were they plussing? Stuff they built that could have been made better. That is, stuff that did not spring to life upon initial creation that was perfect and wholly formed. They constantly added stuff here and there, and they do that still, but not to the extent they used to. So, if they add to GRR for example, that's great and it will be in the tradition of Disney parks from the earliest days. That's what they do. This is how they have always operated. People who see this as some sort of vindication of god knows what simply don't know what Disney park history is, and it seems little else other than DCA sucks. I hope they add a ton to GRR, and make the rest of DCA better and better. What kind of dope would NOT want that?
Originally Posted By gadzuux One of GRRs most important features is to look good from every angle - it's effectively the centerpiece of the entire park, and will be forever. For that reason alone, it should have been more ambitious from day one. It wasn't - it was compromised. But that's the story of all of DCA at it's opening. I think GRR was less compromised than other areas of the park because it was key to the premium priced GCH rooms. It's an icon first and an attraction second. I like 'spirits' description of DCA as a "third gate" - that opened with a weak attraction line-up, including some that were outright - yes - offensive. Not just maliboomer and mulholland, but the whole 'route 66' zone, with the exception of the poorly positioned and poorly named 'golden zephyr'. If GRR has a fault, it's not with the execution of it's theming as much as lack of ambition. It's only as good as it needs to be, and just barely. If it were one part of a roster of terrific attractions, it wouldn't matter so much. But this particular attraction is the centerpiece of the park itself, and it's most permanent installation. It will remain pretty much as is forever. Sure they can spruce it up with added gewgaws along the way, and it will be marginally "better" as a result. But for the most part it is what it is, and it's just okay. Which makes it the perfect symbol for DCA.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << If GRR has a fault, it's not with the execution of it's theming as much as lack of ambition. >> Maybe it's because I've actually done some whitewater rafting in my lifetime, but I think the theming at GRR is spot on. When you go rafting on the more challenging rivers in the U.S., the locations are pretty remote. There aren't any buildings, park rangers, or other window dressing along the way -- it's pretty much just stream beds lines with rocks and trees. GRR is pretty realistic from that perspective -- the idea that there are some sort of characters or "story" to tell along the way doesn't really fit in with the reality of how these excursions take place. Now, if you want to dress it up with cartoon characters and plastic robot animals, I guess it suits some folks' fantasy version of a whitewater rafting trip, but GRR does a better job of recreating a real life adventure than inserting make believe throughout the trip. I like the vibe of GRR. It reminds me of real trips I've taken in the past, and I'd rather evoke my own fond memories than have someone create some fantasyland memories for me that don't mean a whole lot.
