Do the funky chicken?

[airlarry!]

Sigh.

If everything special and magical were quantified according to returns, I wonder if things like original sugar cane trains would have been restored, or secret gardens in Britain built, or, list your own little no-money makers that add to the world.

I understand your point, GC, I just see the entire WDW resort as one big gate, where resorts are like the restaurants and attractions fit to each persons budget but still with the same level of service and magic.

I think I understand Baron's point about the golf resort. It could have been intended to be part of the whole, not an individual part that had to have 'returns.' AS and PC are individual parts that must produce, instead of being 'attractions' that enable the budget conscious to enjoy staying On-Stage.

 

[JeffJewell]

We have reached a baseline. Thank you. It causes me to respect the consistency of your opinion even more.

...take some credit for yourself, on this one. It has been the interaction with you and some others here that has forced me to galvanize my thoughts and focus my points on this topic.

As you also know, I am not a big animation fan. So between early 1983 and May 1999, I have no WDW memories...and truth be told I have few memories from 1983 of WDW. So, my WDW journey began in 1999.

We should all be required by law or board policy to make such confessions... which would then be collected in some sort of DIS reference manual.

Some of my earliest memories are of Disney animation, and their static counterparts Disney comic books (and, as long as we're likely going to mention "quality" in here somewhere, let me tell you that the consistency and quality of Carl Barks' work on Donald Duck comics could almost make Walt Disney look like something of a hack, in comparison). Although the end of 1971 was verboten (in those days, you didn't pull the kids out of school to go to Florida. At least, my family didn't), we helped celebrate Walt Disney World's inaugural year with a visit during the summer of 1972. Yearly trips to WDW (I probably still have a shoe box full of Eastern wings, somewhere) were a family tradition up until about 1984 (including E.P.C.O.T. Center's Grand Opening). College, then my first "real" job and apartment commanded my attention for some years, then a trip to a training class in Orlando offered the chance to reacquaint myself with WDW. Suzy, also a lifelong Disney fan, and I have been making two or three trips a year, for several years, now (the variably tentative May trip would keep us at that rate for this year. I don't mean to jerk you guys around, but I'm still all waffly about it. I can just see myself the evening of May 9th, bags in the trunk, still trying to decide whether to start the car or not).

So, Chad, in other words, you and I have nearly inverse experiences with Disney and WDW, certain to create vastly different expectations. I suppose it's not too surprising that the one thing we can most easily agree on is my admirable consistency of opinion.

that's probably a "taste" issue rather than "standards issue"....

I think I see what you mean, in that our expectations of Disney could be called our "taste" in Disney. I'd like to suggest, though, that it was a difference in Disney's standards during the periods when we were forming our respective expectations/tastes, that led to such a dramatic chasm between them.

Jeff

 

[All Aboard]

Since it's board policy, I guess I must comply:

I've been to WDW roughly 65 times. 31 of those trips have been during 1999-current and have included my daughter (who turned 4 in January). Her first trip was right after her 1st birthday in January, 1999.

My first trip was in the summer of 1977 at age 12. We then took a summer trip each year through high school. I went to college at FSU from 1983-1987 (about 4 hours away from WDW), so I made the trip down quite a bit (about 4-5 times a year).

For the first 2 years after undergrad, I continued to go a couple of times a year. Then from 1990 - 1994 (grad school and "serious career development" ha! ) I only made three trips.

From mid-1994 until January of 1999, I did not go to WDW at all.

Now, we go up about a dozen times a year. It's a 7 hour round trip drive. We mostly do long 3 or 4 day weekends, but do an 8 night trip once a year in January and a 5 night trip in September.

I guess I've seen WDW at all stages of development (except the first 5 years.) My perspective has changed considerably with the birth of our daughter.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Baron--I'm just totally confused by you. Immersive, no immersive, North American good, North American bad...I will always respect your passion even though I am utterly confused by its vision

I blame my writing style, the enormity of the subject and my inability to articulate the 'feelings' which direct my Disney 'vision'.

I feel I'm one of the few that does not vacillate on the issues. In fact, sometime I think I may have too distinct a line between the 'right and wrong' of Disney. I am also trying to accept the new way of Disney and not be so hard-line when it comes to giant, primary colored icons and the selling of plush toys everywhere you turn.

So Scoop. I don't understand your question. Where did I lead you to believe that I don't want Disney to immerse you in everything they offer? As far as North America theme, I consider it a taste issue (same as Fort Wilderness). No, I'm not pleased that everything that Disney has done (with the exception of AK) is themed from the western hemisphere. I would have preferred a more exotic direction. But this is just personal taste. Which is why I don't let it interfere with my assessment of whether or not such a concept is up to the Disney 'standard'. Taste shouldn't matter. Standards should.

Anything else you find confusing?



PS: I think the 'confessions' is a wonderful idea. But it should be it's own thread. Not something that starts of page 12 of a thread that's too long already!!!

 

[YoHo]

I agree with the BAron that it should be its own thread, but I know how these things work. So, I'll add my info here and cut n' Paste if appropriate.

I'm a Young'un around here. I don't quite recall my first trip to WDW or DL, but they both occured sometime between my Birth in 1975 and my Sister's in 1980. Stayed offsite that first time and stayed offsite again in 1986. My First onsite stay was in 1989 when we stayed at the Poly. I fell in love with the resort then. My mom went to a medical convention at the Contemp in 1990, so we stayed there and also got to see Dis/MGM.

My next trip was June of 1996 I went with 3 other good friends and Disney freaks. I was introduced to Food and fun and many of the great resturants this trip. We stayed at Old Key West, so I also got a full on taste of the Bus service that trip and learned to appreciate the Poly even more.

I went again in 1999 this time with 4 other friends including my now wife. We stayed at the Poly and loved every minute of it.
Went again in Jan of 2000 for a long weekend with my now wife to check out the millenium celebration. We stayed at the Contemp which we liked, but not as much as I had in 1990.

I round out my Disney Expireance with a week long trip to Anaheim at the Disneyland Hotel December of 2000 and my very recent honeymoon which was a 4-day Cruise on the Wonder.

 

[dragonflymanor]

Hello all,

After reading almost this entire post (okay, so I skipped a few days...) I think I have come to the conclusion that the Great Rift Valley that exists on DIS is between the following two camps:

DVC-Landbaron's Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda: The tribal elders here look at the current state of Disney and compare it to what it might have been were it not for (choose 1: No Walt, Ei$ner, Pre$$ler, All of the above).

This tribe is in constant conflich with, the "HavaTaLoveIt" tribe. They don't look at the past and compare. They show up, have a great time and then state: "The Magic is as Strong as Ever".

Both are true (how's that for doing a Jeff Probst and sitting on the fence). One could look back and see the CouldaWouldaShoulda's are right. At the same time, if you show up and experience the Magic and that's all that matters, then the HavaTaLoveit's are right.


DragonflyManor leans more to the CouldaWouldaShoulda mostly due to the following facts:

1) DCA. Not at all the best imagineering example.
2) DisneySea. The Best Imagineering example.
3) The fact that Disney management believes that OLC was foolish for building DisneySea leads me to believe that they have decided to abandon the leadership position in themed entertainment.

I still transition to a HavaTaLoveIt while at WDW, when I return I drift back into the Coulda's.

Disney's abandonment of the lead shall be my gain.

Now for the personal stuff:

First trip to WDW was around 1975. Didn't go again until 1999 on business. Kinda was annoyed at the "perfection", but then at that time I was really into outdoor sports like adventure racing where pain, filth, and exhaustion are considered to be part of the fun. Took my daughter and my fiancee in 2000 for a week. Changed my life. I finally found the thing that I was searching for: a way to combine my music, art, and technology. You see, performed in Classical Piano competitions for 8 years while growing up, even getting selected as one of the 4 best Juniors in North Carolina. I have always been an artist, but abandoned all that for the paycheck of a Computer Science career that never quite gave me the satisfaction I wanted.

My wife and I went to WDW on our honeymoon in Jan 2001 and we all went for vacation in July 2001. Now we are paying the bills for 3 trips in 2 years and a wedding on top of that. However, I also started Dragonfly Manor which is comprised of three areas: Design Studios (pays the bills doing website and graphic design), Entertainment (where I get to have fun), and Productions (we are working on two screenplays at the moment). This all keeps me quite busy and I end up working until 2:30 or 3am most nights (getting 3-4 hours of sleep is a learned skill).

Hmmm, perhaps I said too much.......

 

[YoHo]

This forum is acting screwy Must bump this.

 

[JeffJewell]

I have always been an artist, but abandoned all that for the paycheck of a Computer Science career that never quite gave me the satisfaction I wanted.

...we should start a club.

Jeff

 

[YoHo]

My computer career is entirely for the money....
Of course these days there ain't so much money as there was.

I'm thinking professional Disney guest.

 

[raidermatt]

Crankscreachrattlegrindspit------KACHUNK

That was the sound of Raidermatt firing up the old noodle after a weekend of non-Rumors board discussion.

I specifically compared Cinderella’s to Pecos Bill’s! I never, ever mentioned Cosmic Ray. In fact I steered clear of it because it is themed… well… ah… “differently”. And I personally don’t know how to categorize it.

Well, regardless of how Cosmic Ray's is categorized, I don't think we can say it's immersive. I didn't realize you were differentiating between Pecos and Cosmic, but I can go with that.

How is Pecos Bill’s vs. Cindy’s different than Pirates vs. Dumbo? In the context of that ever-elusive standard I’m always talking about, of course.

You see, I contend that there is no difference.

Pecos Bill's is a nicely themed fast food restaurant. There is some detail, and definitely an old west feeling. It has fast food prices, and fast food service. Cinderella's is a nicely themed "sit-down" restaurant. There is more detail than at Pecos, and more attentive service. Your point about them both being Disney quality is a good one. But they are most certainly different categories of restaurants, and the level of immersiveness varies between them. Why? Not every guest wants Cinderella's at every meal. Sometimes, they just want fast food. With Pecos, it is an option, Disney style.

I see this as a good analogy for the Resorts. Per AV's example, sometimes, for whatever reason, guests may not want the full Disney resort treatment. Maybe it's the price, maybe its what they are comfortable with, whatever. They still want to be sure they are in WDW, but they maybe uncomfortable with the lady in a Hula skirt in the lobby who is asking if they want to try Poi. So the concept of a value resort fits just as well as a value restaurant.

Rides/Attractions carry a somewhat different dynamic, because of the way they are packaged and presented. As you point out, Dumbo and Pirates offer different levels of immersiveness, yet they both meet the Disney standard. While there certainly are some people who prefer Dumbo, most will grant that Pirates offers the more immersive escape and certainly has a greater attention to detail. But, just like Value/Deluxe resorts, both have a place within Disney.


AV- I'm basically in agreement with the logic of your post. If the focus is on budget hotels instead of the parks themselves, that's a problem. But I'm just not convinced that's where THE focus is. How the current projects are completed will have a lot to do with my opinion over the next couple of years. (Bug Town & ToT, and other changes/additions at DCA, Pooh at DL, M:S & JIYI at Epcot, Mickey's Philharmonic at MK, etc)

Didn't mean my comment about parenthesis to come off as a knock on your writing style. I sometimes think I use parenthesis a bit much, and lose the point I was trying to make, and my comment was just an acknowledgement of that. Please, remain in your niche and parenthesise away!

 

[JeffJewell]

...which is now known as Cosmic Ray's, was at one time the largest food service establishment under one roof in the Western Hemisphere. There is also the fact that what was considered "futuristic" in 1971 (stark, clean lines; lotsa concrete, metal, and glass) seems rather bland, perhaps even sterile, in 2002.

The Terrace/Ray's conversion was mostly the addition of neon, if memory serves.

That's one of the reasons I was curious about everyone's Disney background. I can understand the point that, three decades out, projects like the Contemporary and Cosmic Ray's don't seemed particularly themed or Magical, at all.

They were something else in 1972, though, let me tell you what.

I can't force anyone to retroactively see the generation-old Magic in what are now inarguably relatively plain facilities. But just because you can't see something right now, doesn't mean it was never there.

Jeff

 

[Peter Pirate]

Very good point Jeff

Just because you can't see something right now, doesn't mean it was never there.

And, just because you don't see something there right now doesn't mean that you won't in the future, either...Right? It works both ways...Rides we see as adults today don't seem classic to us, but I'll tell you right now that as I look back at my life at WDW, the experiences I've had with my daughters will make rides special in our eys and probably in the eyes of many, to make them future classics. For me and my oldest daughter Test Track will fit that bill. I won't bore you with the family details but it will be a ride long remembered for very specific reasons...

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

The Tomorrowland Terrace... ...which is now known as Cosmic Ray's

OH MY GOD!!! Is that Cosmic Ray??? I swear I thought he was talking about the place in EPCOT!!! See!! I STILL call it Tomorrowland Terrace (home of Michael Iceberg!) to my kids (who now know it by that name)! If I had known, a history lesson would have taken place! I hate what they have done to it. And I hate that no imagination whatsoever has gone into that place in thirty years! Anyway, enough ranting…

Well, regardless of how Cosmic Ray's is categorized, I don't think we can say it's immersive.

No it's not!! Pretty sad these people let it fall from the grand concept is was and into this shameful state!! Pretty sad indeed!

Pecos Bill's is a nicely themed fast food restaurant. There is some detail, and definitely an old west feeling. It has fast food prices, and fast food service. Cinderella's is a nicely themed "sit-down" restaurant. There is more detail than at Pecos,

I was right with you until that last little bit. You know, "more detail". I really don't think so. More elegant perhaps, but that's what the theme calls for. But more detail? I really do disagree. And I invoke my new standards (really it was my old one its just that I never was able to put it into words before). The MOVIE FEEL standard. Cause AV is 100% correct. It's the feeling that you're walking into the set of a movie. Pecos Bill's is a western set. Cinderella's is a fantasy period piece. The same!!

I've always said that an "A" ticket ride and an "E" ticket ride were virtually the same. Yes, we all like "E" tickets better than "A". But the concept was the same, universally. (Boy the arguments that caused!!) But now I can put that concept, that feeling if you will, into words. And I've always said that amenities for the resorts shouldn't matter either. I mistakenly thought transportation should be included, but upon further reflection it is but a small piece of the "Disney Standard" picture. I even said amenities shouldn't matter in this very thread. But I had nothing more tangible than a feeling to back that up.

Your point about them both being Disney quality is a good one.

Thanks. Bear with me for a moment. I do have a point and maybe you'll even agree with it.

But they are most certainly different categories of restaurants, and the level of immersiveness varies between them. Why? Not every guest wants Cinderella's at every meal. Sometimes, they just want fast food. With Pecos, it is an option, Disney style.

I agree with 90% of that paragraph and yet feel I have to dismiss the entire thing because of one very important point. And you may think that I'm just playing with semantics, but I think that this is the very essence of the subject.

You said immersiveness. That the immersiveness was different. On that I strongly disagree. Yes, the differences are too apparent to name. Elegant vs. wild west. Table service vs. self serve. Fine dining vs. fast food. On and on, the differences mount. But in order to live up to the Disney Standard, the immersive level MUST remain an equal (or as near as possible). So what are the differences? Ahhhh! It finally came to me. Amenities!! Yes! The things that don't enter into a Disney quality or standard or philosophy or whatever else you want to call it argument!

So, I thank you for bring the question to the forefront of my thought. You forced me to think about it in a new way. And AV capped it all with his old time subtle movie set thing. He, of course, hit the nail on the head. I always knew what I liked about it, but could never put a name on it. It was the 'feel' you had when you drove up to the Golf Resort and stepped into the lobby that made it Disney!!! Add a couple of Disney CMs and it is suddenly unimportant how you get to the MK! The resort automatically falls within the philosophy the same way Dumbo and Peco Bill's falls into it.

And that's the problem, as I see it, with the current direction of Disney lately. And of course that includes the resorts. Which is why WL makes my list and the GF just barely makes it. That's why Dixie Landings and even Port Orleans (to a certain extent) makes my list, but some of the others….

Subjective. You bet! But then again feelings always are. So is great art or literature. I like to think of it in terms of someone getting it or not getting it. Clearly almost everyone on these boards get it! They may not know how to voice it (I sure didn't), but they know it. Conversely it is also apparent that Ei$ner doesn't get it. And he never did. Otherwise we wouldn't see Disney® running rampant.

Is this making more sense now, or have I confused the issue even further?

 

[airlarry!]

Is everyone else having fun reading the various posts regarding the resorts? I am...in fact, I am starting to understand the different views. I would love to see each one of these analyzed by the two/three sides.

Baron, my understanding now is that you consider the development of the resorts to be part of the On-Stage Show. The Golf Resort was the movie set for the big fancy country club resort not everyone has been to, away from the Disney Magic. The Polynesian was that ideal of an Adventureland retreat on some fantastic island out in the Pacific. The Contemp was the 'future' that we didn't quite see embodied in Tomorrowland.

So, the mistakes have been made where the planners fell away from that 'vision' of extending the RESORT idea all the way to the parks. So Dixie Landings and PO fit, Fort Wilderness fits (if you throw in the River Country aspect, built around the same time), but the others are questionable?

I agree now. It is not the concept of price, per se, but the level of SHOW. Pop Century, by this analysis, does not fit. It does not fit in with the Four Parks at all. It is not part of the show.

Anyone care to give us the full treatment of the other resorts? I always saw the Grand Floridian as being part of it, especially since they have changed it to the whole Mary Poppins, sort of English retreat thing.

 

[JeffJewell]

It works both ways...Rides we see as adults today don't seem classic to us, but I'll tell you right now that as I look back at my life at WDW, the experiences I've had with my daughters will make rides special in our eys

...I don't think it's the same thing, at all.

If you went to the Tomorrowland Terrace in 1971, you got an image of the fast food of the future; both the scale and the decor were like nothing else at the time. This was true whether you were five or forty when you saw it.

Reality caught up with Cosmic Ray's. Business discovered "economies of HUGE scale," and the once futuristic design elements now appear to about as futuristic as an Edsel. Go to Cosmic Ray's now, whether you're five or forty, you get an image reminiscent of a school lunchroom.

As far as the last part of your sentence, there are an awful lot of places that Peter and his daughters can experience together and make lifetime memories. That's family magic, not Disney Magic; people make those kinds of memories in all theme parks. And state parks, city parks, and the living room, for that matter. Disney Magic is not the only thing in the world that can delight a child.

You appear willing to give Disney credit for your daughters loving to spend time with you.

Jeff

 

[All Aboard]

That's family magic, not Disney Magic; people make those kinds of memories in all theme parks. And state parks, city parks, and the living room, for that matter. Disney Magic is not the only thing in the world that can delight a child.

BUT!... there's no place that delights my child like WDW does. Not even close.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I agree now. It is not the concept of price, per se, but the level of SHOW.

YES!!!! YES!!!

I couldn't put it into words for the longest time. I felt it, but could not articulate it. And you size it up in one simple sentence!!!

Thank you!!

 

[Peter Pirate]

OK...It's my turn to struggle for sanity, I guess. I reach what I think is a fairly agreeable place and what I get in return is that my daughters and I would share the sme experiences anywhere, not just WDW!

Well then, what makes the classic anything?... It's how people feel about something over a period of time with all of the memories, fun & delight they've shared enjoying these attractions. Why is POC classic? Because of the ride mechanism? Because of the story? Or because of the detail? Sure these things play a part. But the biggest element is father time. This attraction has stood the test of time & drawn legions and generations of followers to sing its praise. If you can't see that this will happen to attractions of today with future generations then we really have nothing to discuss. It seems totally obvious to me that many of the ride classics of tomorrow will not receive that respect, adoration & piety until the torches of time have annoited them.

My daughters don't love me anymore at WDW than they do at Parrot Jungle, the beach, or my living room & to be sure they'll have memories of things that happen at Parrot Jungle, the beach & our living room as well as WDW, but the magic afforded by WDW allows for so many magic moments in such short periods of time the fun factor cannot be overlooked.

 

[JeffJewell]

I reach what I think is a fairly agreeable place and what I get in return is that my daughters and I would share the sme experiences anywhere

...actually, what I said was that you and your daughters had it within your capacity to have "experiences" that would be "long remembered for very specific reasons" even outside of WDW.

If that's not an "agreeable place" to be, then I'm sorry... in all kinds of ways.

Jeff

 

[raidermatt]

It is not the concept of price, per se, but the level of SHOW.

Baron/Larry - I do believe I understand. A couple of points though:

1- I still don't see Peco Bill's as having the same level of show as Cinderella's. Standing in line for a CM sitting at an electronic cash register, so I can move forward to a counter where I see into the food prep area, and then making sure I exit so as to not collide with other guests is just not the same level of show as Cinderella's (for me). I know, Cinderella's is not an authentic reprodcution of a fantasy kingdom, but its closer (at least in my eyes) than Pecos Bill's is to the old west. Again, its not that I have a problem with Pecos, because I don't, its just that I recognize the difference on all levels. You may call these things amenities, and therefore unimportant, but to me LOOKING like a movie set and FEELING like a movie set are different. Pecos looks, and to a certain extent feels like a movie set, but I maintain the Cinderella's does a much better job on the feeling side.

2- I guess if you don't believe there is a difference in show between Pecos and Cinderella's, or between Pirates and Dumbo, then I can understand how you would not accept a difference in show among resorts. But I honestly do see that difference, and I'm ok with putting up a resort that recognizes that difference, because its what some want.

3- While I recognize the difference in show among restaurants and resorts, and accept it, its only because Disney still offers me the choice as to which level I want. I don't have to stay at AS, and I don't have to eat at Pecos.

I think we are getting pretty close to the agree to disagree stage. But at least we seem pretty close to putting our finger on exactly what we are disagreeing on, and that is the level of show.

If I could pose a question, it might help me confirm whether or not I truly "get" your point. If, in your opinion, the value resorts did offer that level of show you want to see, but offered fewer amenities, and therefore charged a lower price, would you be ok with it? For instance, lets say ASMovies, in your opinion, made you feel like it was that movie set you are looking for. Maybe it only had fast food, but it was of Pecos Bill caliber. There's not a spa, or exercise room, etc. COULD that fit in with your vision of what WDW should be?


I also echo what Peter means (at least what I think he means). Certainly I don't need Disney to create family memories. But that holds no matter who is running Disney, and how they are doing it. The question is, what vacation destinations help facilitate those memories more than others. WDW and DLresort come up at the top of my list.