Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>> The problem though barboy is that it could not be helped, when WDW opened they had no idea how many parks etc. would be built, building them to close together would create landlock. I like that they are spaced out, it prevents you from seeing into another park and ruining the magic. at DL for instance if you are in TL and look at space mountian you can see ToT. To me having the parks that close together kills it.<<< The "Blessing of Size" is easily fixed by a monorail. That's another thing I don't forgive them for...They seriously couldn't make a line for MGM and DAK, like planned? LBV, at least, too.
Originally Posted By Disneydanny 1. reviving the years '72-'83 by running the originl Country Bear Jamboree year round changing Starland to Toontown Faire Updating the song "Canada (You're a Lifetime Journey" Allowing "Journey Into Your Imagination" (w/o Figment) to run 2 years. Lack of "Small World" and "Haunted Mansion" Holiday.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 One thing and one thing only ... and it really sums up every other post in this thread in one way or another: They don't try anymore. Really try.
Originally Posted By barboy2 Hold on you two(Hista 98 & brotherdave)--- it's safe to say that you don't understand my concern regarding the sheer vastness of WDW: you assumed that ideally I would have favored a spacial setup like Disneyland Resort when I would not have. Both DLR and WDW's setup are not ideal; DLR is too compact and WDW is too vast. WDW's parks and hotels should have been way, way closer together but far enough apart where they don't encroach on eachother's themes. WDW's features should have been close enough to eachother whereby a short tram ride(even better if monorail) could service each resort or park. And there should have been a centralized mammoth parking structure thus eliminating ugly car traffic once on property. Think DLR but on a much grander scale: motorists park their cars at the centralized structure and then tram out to Carribean Beach or EPCOT. Hence, no more ugly Disney Transports making noise nor epic traveling times from Animal Kingdom to Boardwalk.
Originally Posted By bobbelee9 I agree with a lot of answers already given and I want to add the Adventureland Veranda. One of the biggest problems IMHO with fastpass is that you totally miss out on the themeing. We only FP TSMM and Soarin' this trip.
Originally Posted By magnet >>>One of the biggest problems IMHO with fastpass is that you totally miss out on the themeing.<<< Yes. This is part of the reason why I say it is destructive to the guest experience. FP tends to make one focus and plan one's day around a checklist of rides, rather than taking everything in. The FP can control your day, if you allow it, rather than letting you choose when to do what. It is at odds with the way WDW should be experienced.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Both DLR and WDW's setup are not ideal; DLR is too compact and WDW is too vast. WDW's parks and hotels should have been way, way closer together but far enough apart where they don't encroach on eachother's themes. WDW's features should have been close enough to eachother whereby a short tram ride(even better if monorail) could service each resort or park.>> The development of both WDW and DL has a lot to do with the fact neither was ever expected to have more than one 'theme park'. WDW was built to have MK ... and EPCOT was supposed to be a city ... everything else was supposed to be resorts and greenbelts. EC was built in a perfect locale and couldn't logically have been any closer to MK unless it was placed where the TTC and parking lot are (which actually was considered very briefly, thank God, in the mid-70s). Connecting it via monorail (and later water taxi) meant it was very convenient for most people. Disney-MGM was rushed into development and wound up with a very haphazard development over the last two decades, but it too was supposed to be connected via monorail. By that time, so much of WDW had been developed or set aside for other purposes. DAK's location also makes sense because of its size and the development of Buena Vista west, which included BB, Coronado and the All Star resorts. It's great to say 'things should have been closer' but they really shouldn't be. WDW just needs a better transport system, so folks aren't sitting or waiting on buses. As to DL, again, it wasn't supposed to have a second gate. By the time TWDC decided that it wanted to make every park a 'resort', the only place to stick DCA that made sense was right where it is. I can criticize Disney for many things, but not how far or how close the parks are to each other.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 > putting the BAH in front of the theatre > ever putting Poo playground in FL > removing sky ride > 20K gone and not replaced like in DL > not enhancing DHS as a real studio experience- from artists to backstage tour > DDP watering down some menu's and raising prices > letting the HM get so bad before the refurb > cutting Potc short in WDW vs DL > removing so much live enertainment from the parks- from street performer to shows > replacing the castle souveneir shop with a bibbity bobbity bootique > removing all remants of disney institute offerings > horizons > what they did to JII and canning dreamfinder > letting CoP deteriorate and ignoring it > making some things 'seasona;' even things like the egg roll cart in AL > walmarting of main street USA > removal of all beef hot dog from Casey's ( yeah you might be noticing a food trend here) > removal of sorcery in the sky in the studios > allowing GMR - to suffer from poor maintenance > not ensuring WWoHP was put into DHS instead of Uni > eventual removal of most resort unique merchandise
Originally Posted By MousDad >> not ensuring WWoHP was put into DHS instead of Uni << Oooh, that's a good one. An aggregious act of ommission. Nice.
Originally Posted By -em Let's see.. 1)>>They don't try anymore. Really try<< Agreed. There has been moments of brilliance shown through but for the most part.... 2) Letting the amazing cast go and not retaining the quality people 3) Adventurer's Club 4) Tarzan Rocks 5) Tapestry of Nations/Epcot Parade. I miss having a parade/show at Epcot 6) Monorails. I love 'em would love to see MORE of them (and I'd love some Mark VIIIs) 7) "One Disney" overuse. I think for a lot of facets its needed and required but every hotel/park/resort needs SOME individuality because they are NOT cookie cutter properties. 8)The "Wal-Marting" of merchandise. I know there is more I want to add but for now...
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost WWoHP...I thought that Universal owned the rights to Harry Potter. How was Disney going to use that franchise? That's like being a Universal fan and being upset because there is no Mickey Mouse attraction in the park. What am I missing here?
Originally Posted By dshyates Harry Potter is owned by Warner Bros. Universal is just licensing the property.
Originally Posted By MousDad >>WWoHP...I thought that Universal owned the rights to Harry Potter. How was Disney going to use that franchise? That's like being a Universal fan and being upset because there is no Mickey Mouse attraction in the park. What am I missing here?<< Disney was a player in the competition (with Uni) to get the Potter theme park rights. Rowling made the decision, because she wanted it built at a level of quality equal to her expectations. Uni then goes out and builds the greatest theme park experience ever created. Putting 2 and 2 together suggests that Disney wasn't willing to commit to that level of quality. i.e. They dropped the ball, and basically publicly admitted that "No, we have no desire to do things this well." Spirit summed this mentality up very nicely a few posts ago.
Originally Posted By disney pete Theres a ton of stuff but main gripes 1. 20,000 leagues 2. skyway 3. The upkeep and maintainence of all parks 4. The transforming of great places into princess places theres a lot more but thats my top 4
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Disney was a player in the competition (with Uni) to get the Potter theme park rights. Rowling made the decision, because she wanted it built at a level of quality equal to her expectations. Uni then goes out and builds the greatest theme park experience ever created. Putting 2 and 2 together suggests that >>>Disney wasn't willing to commit to that level of quality. i.e. They dropped the ball, and basically publicly admitted that "No, we have no desire to do things this well." Spirit summed this mentality up very nicely a few posts ago.>>> Alrighty then...that is the part of the story that I was missing. Must be I didn't get that memo. As long as we are discussing Uni...I have noticed for years that the quality of their attraction was making Disney look like rank amateurs. I have no way of knowing the numbers but if I were a gambler I would put money on the fact that Uni has spent way more in recent years than Disney on the Parks and in many cases it shows. Sooner or later Disney will no longer be able to stand on the reputation of Walt and the brand name he created...there has to be some meat in it over time.
Originally Posted By MousDad ^Could be the problem isn't how much they spend, but rather how they spend.
