Originally Posted By Dabob To get back to the idea of DCA becoming DL 2.0 vs. DCA sticking to its "hip and edgy" ethos... First of all, let me say I visited in November and didn't find it particularly "hip and edgy." It felt much like other non-MK Disney parks I've been to; i.e. no mistaking it was Disney, yet had a more laid back and somewhat more "mature" feel than a MK-style park. If it was radically more "hip and edgy" early on, I can't say, as I wasn't there. But, of course, something that comes to mind is "hip and edgy compared to what??" Compared to DL? That's one thing. Compared to, say, La Mama or the Wooster Group? Something else! My thought was that it was probably supposed to be H&E compared to DL, which wouldn't be such a bad thing, IMO. Or at least more adult-feeling. Again, by the time I got there, it felt pretty much in the wide Disney-but-not-MK spectrum of EPCOT, D/MGM, etc. I do wonder what would have happened if they'd stuck with their guts a little while longer. Maybe (and remember, I said MAYBE), it could have found its audience given a little time. Shows like Cheers, All in the Family, Hill Street Blues and many others were ratings disasters initially, but not because they weren't good. The networks let them find their audience, and eventually they became quite popular indeed. But if you go back and look at the first seasons, you see they were just as good then as they were later. They didn't go up in the ratings because they got better, per se; they went up because eventually they found their audience. Of course, for every Cheers or Hill Street, there are probably 10 examples of a Frank's Place (a GREAT show that they killed before it could find its audience). I have no idea if large numbers of people would have started getting into DCA for what it was if they had stuck longer to the original concept or not, but it's interesting to think about, anyway.
Originally Posted By Davko58 Fascinating discussion. While almost exclusively a lurker on LP, I've seen this argument hashed out repeatedly in other forums. What's missing here is the tourist perspective. I just returned from 3 days at the DL Resort. My party consisted of myself (lifelong Disneyland fan), 2 casual DL/theme park fans, and one old DL fan who hadn't been in years. This was the second visit to DCA for 3 of us, the first for the other. The casual fans made sure before we left for CA that DCA would be on the agenda, as they LOVED Bug, Soarin, GRR, and Screamin last year. For a mere $90 we were able to visit 2 parks over three days, cheaper than my 3 day visit to DL 3 years ago. It's a tremendous bargain. All 3 of us commented on the extensive detail and subtle theming found in DCA. No, not many singing stuffed animals, but lots of realistic buildings and little hidden references that we all were able to "get". Someone a while back mentioned some specific features of the park that supposedly turn the average visitor off. Games? We love games and played most of them. I won a porpoise, a basketball, and a snake. My girl loved me for it. Tortillas? "How neat, a free tortilla!" "The best tortilla I've ever had". Mulholland Madness? Well, we were all laughing and screaming so I think we all had fun on it. Golden Dreams? "Wow, a serious thing in a theme park. It was pretty good". The food is FAR superior to the slop offered up at DL, especially in the Pacific Wharf food court. Live entertainment? We didn't see any kiddie shows, but did enjoy that band on the woodie playing that party song by Pink. Pretty adult stuff. Is this still a more "adult" park than DL? Of course. Smaller crowds, far fewer strollers, wide walkways, relaxed atmosphere. Then there was our favorite attraction: The Cove Bar. It is absolutely wonderful to be able to sit outside on a nice evening and have some alcoholic drinks (ok, a LOT of alcoholic drinks) and some semi-sophistiated appetizers while watching the Paradise Pier lights come on. That was followed by heavy game playing and of course more attractions. We enjoyed the Electrical Parade despite it being "rehashed" and "recycled"? Who cares? I could care less about Disney business issues; I don't go to a theme park to audit their books. I go to enjoy myself, and boy did we do that. Yeah, they're adding some more kiddie stuff and the characters are around. So? It's a Disney park, everyone expects that stuff. Those additions will in no way cancel out the very unique feel of DCA. Our group's biggest complaint was the hack job done on Tomorrowland. The one who hadn't been in years couldn't believe what they had done to it. Nobody complained one bit about DCA. If DCA isn't your cup of tea, stay away. Leave it for those of us who enjoy an alternate universe just steps from our other favorite unreal venue. I fail to see how anyone can complain about this park in serious terms. It isn't Disneyland? THANK GOODNESS! They already have one across the way.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 You know, I've seen "small crowds" mentioned a lot in the good reviews of DCA as being one of the best things about this park, but I've got to point out that this isn't something Disney wants to have happening at DCA. I'm sure they would be much happier if the crowds were like they were during the passholder previews everyday. So I have to ask, would large crowds (like over at Disneyland) have changed the enjoyment of this park any? Is DCA really designed to handle the number of people they were hoping for, or would we have another MGM on our hands. (Of course, if they were having capacity crowds all the time, I bet they would be adding a lot more to the park than they already are.)
Originally Posted By crapshoot <<So I have to ask, would large crowds (like over at Disneyland) have changed the enjoyment of this park any? Is DCA really designed to handle the number of people they were hoping for...>> ***************************************** "Too Popular? Disney's California Adventure should bring in the crowds. But that will create a challenge for the new park, because on busy days some attractions won't be able to handle the demand. Estimates of the number of patrons who can be served per hour on some Disneyland and California Adventure rides: Disneyland Rides______________________ Capacity (riders/hour) Pirates of the Caribbean____________________ 2,775 Big Thunder Mtn Railroad____________________ 2,250 Haunted Mansion______________________________2,150 Indiana Jones________________________________1,850 California Adventure Rides______________________Capacity (riders/hour)* California Screamin'________________________ 2,200 Grizzly River Run____________________________2,100 Soarin' Over California______________________1,250 Sun Wheel______________________________________900" From: The Most Jam-Packed Theme Park on Earth? L.A. Times 1/14/01 E. Scott Recard Further to clear up another misconception cited from this article about the 7 Million figure. The article came out as shown in 1/14/01, but the 7 million couldn't possibly have been "an adjustment upwards" around this time. The reason is a little quote from Barry Braverman in this article: "In designing California Adventure, Disney imagineers worked backward from the projected attendance level of 7 million a year, said Barry Braverman, Disney's chief creative supervisor on the project" This clearly indicates that the 7 million figure has been a goal since the beginning of the project. We are all wrong in our citation of the original park estimates being adjusted upward more recently than what is actual. **************************************** And to Dacko58, welcome. Yours is the first post of a trip to DCA that I have read that even hinted to playing the midway games. And the fact that you enjoyed the heck out of it is great in of itself. On the other side of the coin, those of us who have negative issues with the park generally visit it on a fairly regular basis. So don't tell us to stay away, but perhaps join us in trying to understand the problems and look for better solutions to make it a better place for everyone.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "California Screamin'__________ 2,200" Wow, I had no idea that Screamin' had such a high capacity. I suppose that number is for all of the trains running - I wonder what its capacity is now?
Originally Posted By Davko58 Crapshoot: this is what I don't understand. You have "negative issues with the park" yet you say you visit on a regular basis. I guess I have to ask why? And I look at it this way: You're not supposed to visit on a regular basis. It's a theme park, a place you go on vacation; especially DCA which was designed to encourage visitors to stay an extra day. For me and my party at least, it worked amazingly well. We stayed an extra day. I'm a tourist who goes once a year and I love it. For me to go anywhere all the time (even DL) would cause burnout. While I understand that some are interested in all the business stuff; financial results, attendance figures, capacity, etc., I couldn't care less. I go to have a good time. You ask that we work together to find solutions, well, I don't see a need for any solutions and you or I have absolutely no impact whatsever on what the Disney company ultimately decides to do (unless you're in some sort of focus group). I don't own Disney, and I don't feel that I'm entitled to anything. They put something out there and I either like it or I don't. Other than the parks, I dislike almost everything they do. I don't want to sound mean or nasty, but it strikes me as being rather a huge waste of time and energy for me to complain constantly about their lousy movies and crummy TV channel. I just don't watch them. As for the midway games, there is nothing more fun than having a few kamikazes and then winning a silly stuffed animal for your grateful girlfriend.
Originally Posted By crapshoot <<. I guess I have to ask why? And I look at it this way: You're not supposed to visit on a regular basis. It's a theme park, a place you go on vacation; especially DCA which was designed to encourage visitors to stay an extra day.>> Each of us have various motives for going to DCA. For me it is a cold beer at the Cove Bar. Also, I consult for Disney from time to time, so I try and stay as current as feasible. Anyway that is why Annual Passes are offered. Locals drop in for a quick visit. At that point it becomes more of a resort experience for many as opposed to a day at a themepark.
Originally Posted By jonvn "So I have to ask, would large crowds (like over at Disneyland) have changed the enjoyment of this park any?" The larger the crowds, the more unpleasant any theme park becomes. But because DCA has such wide walkways, and lower overall capcity while having some high capacity rides, even if it has a lot of people in it, it will always seem not as sardine packed, particularly less so than a similarly sized crowd at Disneyland.
Originally Posted By crapshoot <<But because DCA has such wide walkways, and lower overall capcity while having some high capacity rides, even if it has a lot of people in it, it will always seem not as sardine packed, particularly less so than a similarly sized crowd at Disneyland.>> I don't agree that the wide walkways will help aleviate cramped feelings on crowded days. It is largey the queues and the DL Railroad that soak up guests at DL. Main St. USA is crowded at opening, closing and parades and fireworks. Otherwise, the attractions take up the brunt of guests. However, Fastpass has reduced the number of guests in any one queue, so at times the park feels more crowded than prior to FP. But more than the issue of crowds would be the fact that the low capacity rides at DCA and in particular, Soarin' can't accomodate everyone on capacity days. On busy days, FastPass can be sold out by 11:00 for the day as it is now. This is where the danger of the park's rides and attraction numbers will most likely create a negative appeal. But of all the intense issues, this is one that Disney has been able to dodge so far, for the most part.
Originally Posted By jonvn The proof has to be in how the park is when it is very crowded. I've not been on a very crowded day. There have been crowded days, so the people who went on those days would know best.
Originally Posted By OrlandoBoi "Hey, my 'Orlandoboi' buddy ... did you think your topic was going to get this interesting? " Hi Futurist, my good friend! Well-after being here for almost two years, I guess I know the merry go round by now-although my intention was not to start yet ANOTHER debate. As I stated-I just enjoyed some days at DCA. If anybody is interested, I am now up in San Francisco(Daly City). I went to the Winchester Mystery House today(GREAT fun and very creepy!!!)and I am heading up to Calveras County tomorrow to tour some caves. I am also pigging out on some disgusting only-in-America cuisine like jalapeno poppers. We don't have anything like this back home. I am getting afraid that I may have to buy some more(bigger)clothes before I head back!!! ; )
Originally Posted By jonvn Board seems to be working right again... "If it was radically more "hip and edgy" early on, I can't say, as I wasn't there" It was never really hip and edgy. It was just a bit less saccharine. Maybe for Disney that's hip and edgy, but otherwise, it was just less kiddie-like. "it felt pretty much in the wide Disney-but-not-MK spectrum of EPCOT, D/MGM, etc." It's very very much like that. I think that's a good thing. Variety is the spice of life. Making the park different was an important idea. It could be that they made it a bit too different for some tastes right away. But even though they have put in some more typical Disney style things, it's still different in tone. I think if they stuck more to the original concept, it would eventually have attracted a more sophisticated crowd. But really, it's not changed all that much since day one. A couple restaurants closed, street entertainment modified, that's about it. They did dumb these things down a bit, but I'd say that nearly all of what was there before is still there now. There is nothing more appealing in this park than the cove bar. Not that I'm a lush, but it is something to be really enjoyed. And I can't tell you how much I enjoyed the winery as it was originally built. I only got to eat once at the terrace there, but that deli truly was wonderful, and its passing is a major loss. I can understand them wanting to make sure the place makes the bucks, and that it's not an art museum, but there is a lot to be said for quality, and DCA on opening really had a lot of fine quality offerings. I think the main problems with the two restaurants that closed were that 1) There are just too many eateries in the park, particularly in that area with a dearth of attractions and 2) the prices. I'm not exactly a miser, but when I saw the prices at the Vineyard room, I had to laugh. It was just too big a leap to make. But you see, in Epcot, they have many restaurants, some of which are a bit pricey. But they are quite good. I particularly like Alfredos. Man that was a good place. They also have their stinkers there, too. Le Cellier was very weak. And the Coral Reef (I think that's the name) was very very pricey for what it was. Maybe this is starting like it should go into the Disney Dining section. Anyway, it looks to me that this sort of offering which is quite popular in Epcot was trying to be offered at DCA. Not a bad idea. But I think the issues I mentioned kind of hurt them. Hopefully they are not tossing out the entire concept of a more adult park, but only altering the mix slightly to allow more things for the tykes that are in all likelyhood going to be tagging along. Certainly Millionaire is not something a small kid can get involved in, and TOT is not really something for small kids, either. Flik's is whole family stuff. So, it kind of looks to me like they are trying to tread more of a middle path in what they are building, all while keeping this park distinct in flavor from the original.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 You know jon, reading through your last comments about DCA really opened my eyes about exactly what I think Eisner was going for with this park -- I think he was making a place that HE personally would enjoy. We all know he has a thing for Seaside Piers, and I bet he and his wife love high quality shopping and restaurants, you know - typical yuppie stuff. For them, attractions are secondary (and they probably look down their noses at Disneyland), but a high class resort is something they crave. But I think when designing for upper class American tastes, they kind of forgot that most upper class Americans avoid theme parks, and it's mostly middle America that spends their time there. You mention Epcot as proof that this sort of park can work, but I have to disagree. EPCOT was an entirely different creature than DCA - the restuarants and shopping were almost secondary when the park first opened. The real draw was Future World with all it's amazing technology and attractions. World Showcase was just the icing on the cake. (And the restaurant prices really weren't that much higher than the other offerings when it first opened) Today, it seems to be a little different as Future World has slowly declined, but Epcot's been established for 20 years now, so it still mostly works. I'm just not sure that DCA has the right attraction mix to attract most of middle America and still have that "yuppie" feel with all the high quality restuarants and such. Maybe in time, but I think it will take a major re-working of the attraction offerings before that happens.
Originally Posted By Dabob <There is nothing more appealing in this park than the cove bar. > I've heard enough people say this that I'm really sorry we missed it on our visit. When we went, it was in its transition/renovation from Puck to non-Puck. I'm looking forward to grabbing a beer and sitting out on the terrace next time. And Jon, I'm not surprised that it was never REALLY all that "hip and edgy." Hip and edgy compared to DL, maybe, but that's not such a bad thing. It should have a different vibe than DL, it did, and I quite liked it.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I think Eisner was going for with this park -- I think he was making a place that HE personally would enjoy." Oh, I would hope so, actually. It's far less cynical to build something that you think is good yourself, and hope that others agree, than to build something you think is "good enough for who it's for." How can we ever be uplifted if people who do things always think the worst of their customers? I am much happier that Eisner and company felt that they had a customer base who would appreciate some finer things in life, rather than a customer base who wants to do simpler things. It means they think more highly of the people they are trying to appeal to.
Originally Posted By dshyates I want to see Eisner on a Wave Swinger. "Wheeeeeee" said little Mikey. "Can we go on the Mad Maus next?"
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "I am much happier that Eisner and company felt that they had a customer base who would appreciate some finer things in life, rather than a customer base who wants to do simpler things." I see your point, but I'm not sure I would classify much of DCA as some of the "finer things in life", and I certainly don't think Disneyland is "simplistic". But I agree with you when you say that Eisner would enjoy most of DCA - but I would exclude the attractions. I just don't get the impression from Eisner that he really cares for Disney-style attractions - even the few at DCA. (This may or may not be the case, but it's just the impression I get.) Therefore, I feel they took plenty of time designing the dining and shops (things Eisner enjoys) and kind of half-did the attractions, almost as if they were an after thought. (Though there are a few that are truly great.) And while I enjoy shopping and dining, I won't pay $45 to sit at a bar and spend more money, and I think the majority of guests at Disney's parks would agree with me. Hence I feel that when designing a theme park attractions should always be top priority, with dining and shopping designed to complement the attractions. I just don't feel this was done with the Disneyland expansion.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> ...reading through your last comments about DCA really opened my eyes about exactly what I think Eisner was going for with this park... << I'm sure he and Barry Braverman share the general sentiments and perceptions expressed by some here on LP's message board. To this, add a dash (perhaps a healthy one) of misguided sense of loyalty to the group or clique, wounded-pride stubborness, and I-can't-possibly-be-wrong egotism, and it's no wonder that creative goofs and errors in judgement can occur -- and continue to occur -- within the DisCo., or any large organization for that matter. No surprise, really. After all, look at that religious institution based in Rome. Supposedly predicated on moral, decent behavior, some of its key people have made decisions that contradict or flout this. So it's less puzzling when those who are in a corporation supposedly known for artistic skill and creativity -- and who aren't dealing with something as serious as an allegation or act of illegal behavior, but with something as innocuous as a new theme park in Anaheim -- can make decisions that contradict or flout this.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 I guess all along, my biggest point of confusion has been in picturing Disney execs looking at an empty parking lot next to Disneyland and saying something like - "Here is the most successful, popular and groundbreaking theme park in the world! Let's build something completely different next door. Huh?
