Originally Posted By TomSawyer The playground is a good way to have a placeholder for a new attraction down the road without a big empty space. It adds motion and color to an area that other wise would suck the energy out of the surroundings. Disney found something to put in that would get more guests off the walkways where kids can let go of Mom and Dad's hand and run crazy for a few minutes. It will be easy to come back in a few years to put in a new attraction. But in the mean time, they've found a way to use the land temporarily until that new attraction is greenlit.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <It will be easy to come back in a few years to put in a new attraction. But in the mean time, they've found a way to use the land temporarily until that new attraction is greenlit.< I hope you're right, as that truly is the half full glass view, my fear is that this IS the attraction we are getting
Originally Posted By DVC_dad That is a very good point...I find it VERY hard to believe that the MK went to ALL that trouble to fill in the lagoon, plant trees, and everything else...to simply install a mediocre playground.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 11 years of complaining from guests may have had something to do with it-- the had to fill it in eventually anyway-- can't let stagnant water sit anywhere with West Nile..... I would have preferred the grass and trees, I would have had more hope they would do something with it eventually ( and please let's already remember how long this has been ) - the playgroudn to me says, here's your attraction --
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Again, DVC Dad, I really and truly hope I am wrong, but wheen is the last time we even heard a 'rumor' of something there ? Before the Pooh playground at least we had rumors, now nothing. Even when they were lying to us about it being own for an extensive rehab I had more hope. What are the rumors now for MK -- a replacement for Timekeeper and maybe even the demise of CoP......anything about that mound behind the poor excuse for an attraction ? Nope....The silence is deafening
Originally Posted By DVC_dad Double ouch. You are making perfect sense though. I would rather have had an e-ticket ride no doubt. Guess they showed us.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney VBDAD55, I think it's hopeless. It's like debating religion. People either realize why it doesn't belong or they see no harm in it despite the fact it goes against everything the MK is supposed to be about. And the argument that something's better than nothing is ridiculous. Would I rather see a nice empty green lot or a boarded up tenament (because it is something after all and eventually it will be replaced by something else). There's a four letter word that comes to mind when I am asked to describe Pooh's Playground ... any guess as what I'm thinking? ;-)
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I have more than 1 guess that fits for me but they would all be admin'd.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper "goes against everything the MK is supposed to be about." And, what is that?
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>it was a useful place, if not a very inspired or exciting one.<<< That doesn't sound very cool. Anyone have pics? >>>"goes against everything the MK is supposed to be about." And, what is that?<<< "Adults are interested if you don't play down to the little 2 or 3 year olds or talk down." "Disneyland is a show." "It's kind of fun to do the impossible." "It's no secret that we were sticking just about every nickel we had on the chance that people would really be interested in something totally new and unique in the field of entertainment." "We believed in our idea - a family park where parents and children could have fun- together." Well, there you have it. Sounds like Tom Sawyer island fits the bill a lot better anyway. As does Ariel's playground...but, you can't just "park" your kids and chill on a bench, you have to jump in and play WITH them...kinda the whole idea of a Magic Kingdom (at least, Walt seemed to think so). Sorry, but my toddler and I have had tons of fun on Tom Sawyer island (the ULTIMATE playground, if you ask ME), and I have fun with her in generic parks with swings and slides too...but that's not what we go to Disneyland for.
Originally Posted By MinnieSummer vbdad: I'm 43 and my husband is 56. Our daughter is just now out of the toddler stuff so it was a challenge -- of course it was worse for him being sooooooooooo ooooooooold.
Originally Posted By MinnieSummer OOPS, that should have gone to DVC dad not vbdad. Sorry, I get confused sometimes.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad TO: MinnieSummer: Holy Mother of Hopscotch! Monkey on a Stick! Jumpin Jehosaphat! Leapin' Lizards! Ay Caramba! That is one old dadofatoddler! LOL Just kiddin' ! How old were you when she was born? Is this your ONLY child? W O W ! ! ! Okay sorry to over re-act. And by the way I take it as a total complement to be confused with vbdad55 however he may see that differently.
Originally Posted By Fe Maiden <<goes against everything the MK is supposed to be about.>> Are the MK Commandments on display somewhere? I want to make sure I'm on board with everything. <<Would I rather see a nice empty green lot or a boarded up tenament>> On my last visit in Nov '04 all that was there was a boarded-up wall. <<but that's not what we go to Disneyland for. >> Looking at the one of the recent LP Lotions may I suggest you avoid Goofy's Playhouse.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper The average guest spends what, 8 or 9 hours in the park. Of those 8 or 9 hours a good 4 of them could be spent just standing in a line. I've got no problem with giving my kid 20 minutes to a half hour of run around and be a kid time on a playground. In fact, I welcome it. Could it have been nicer? Sure. But, if indeed it is "temporary" than how much do they really need to spend to make it not look cheap? Is the location great? Well, not if you are a 20K lover or just generally have to have an E-ticket. But for me, a guy who is about to have a toddler and an infant in tow, Fantasyland is the perfect place for this tot playground.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer If it isn't appropriate for the MK to have a kid's play area that isn't something that the entire family can enjoy, is it also inapproprate for Disney to build any attraction with a minimum height requirement or health warnings?
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney "And, what is that?" For way too many here? McDonald's play areas so they can sit on their behinds and let their little toddlers bounce around. All for $65 a day! What a bargain! Seriously, if you think that playgrounds like this are what WDW's planners and creators envisioned, that's cool. You're wrong, but you have every right to be so. But I'm not doing a tutorial on what the MK is all about, why it was planned a certain way and why certain elements were put in or left out. If you have young kids, don't care about Disney history or think anything's better than nothing, feel free to love the place. I'll sign up to drive the bulldozer when saner heads prevail at Disney!
