DinoRama

[Peter Pirate]

We went to AK this weekend and I got to see firsthand the new DinoRama...Most of you know I was supportive of Disney in this venture, most of you know I take a wait & see attitude towards judgement...Well, I saw it this weekend and I have to say that my expectation were not met...They were exceeded. Not by the Tricertops Spin, not by the Carnival games and not by the now visible Primieval Whirl, but rather by the whole of it.

DinoRama is ging to be a great addition to this area of AK and a big hit with families. The spinner we know kids will love, Dinosaur is a quality E ticket, the new 'mouse' coaster looks fun, the games are neither dirty nor played-up with the traditional 'carney bark' & Tarzan Rocks is right around the corner. The area is bright and energetic and now complete...An area for the whole family, that Walt would approve of...In my estimation th only thing lacking is another generic attraction - A Carousel... A Dino inspired carousel would be icing on the cake for families with tykes and the young at heart.

I know that DinoRama won't change a single persons view of AK who doesn't already like AK, but AK is my favorite Park and the DinoRama is a positive step in its evolution. Too often we adults wish for the unique and cutting edge when if fact the tried and true, done right, fit the bill quite perfectly. My kids are getting older (the youngest is now 8) and still enjoy these simple diversions. As for the games, well, tell me what's better than a Dad winning his Daughters a big stuffed animal for a couple of bucks? Anyone?

I am so happy with the new area that I am no longer sure that the plans we've been hearing for BK are necessary or even the proper move for AK. I'm thinking that the importation of a "Soarin' Over..." clone and an additional animal land (Austrailia) make more sense than imposing a rollercoaster at a Park that rollercoaster fans aren't going to (generally) like anyway. AK is a passive Park & I'm wondering what the value of a fast, thrilling coaster really would be...

:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[HBK]

Peter....


In a time when more and more people are questioning the value of a WDW trip (First timers especially) they opened a simple "tried and true" carnival....a slight upgraded version of the carnival which blows into your local town for three days.

I've seen the pictures and commented....well it looks like they took the ride area from the Big E (a local fair/festival). That's not a comment. People are expected to pay a premium price for a Disney vacation experince. Adding a run of the mill carnival, which even slightly upgraded, is not going to drive attendance to an already suffering park.

And regarding Beastly Kingdom....

I disagree with you on one point and agree with another. I feel beastly is a desperatly needed addition to DAK. A run of the mill carnival will not fix the attendance problems. People can get that anywhere. The point of a Disney vacation is you are supposed to experince something much different than your typical day at a carnival or six flags. So that's where I disagree with you.

What I agree with you about is what type of ride should be imported to Beastly kingdom. I agree that a large thrill ride roller coaster should not be built. There are a majority of people who go to Disney because of the tameness of the rides. A RNR style coaster should be held off until the attendance is at a good level....then it should be brought in as an enticement for current guests who love thrills and to bring in new guests. I really feel thrill rides are a niche...and right now DAK needs to add attractions with sweeping appeal. So that's where we agree.

Now what would I build if I were put in charge of BK?

I would be looking for something where the story line of the ride takes precidence over the ride's thrills. Something technologicly advanced. Something to make a marketing impact.

Forget the Soarin clone.

Clone Spiderman at IOA.

It's gentle enough for just about anyone to ride, but intense enough for the thrill seekers to get their rush. It's pretty much advertised as the best ride in Orlando (all of the WDW guide books which also review US/IOA state this. Kim Wiley's book immediatly comes to mind...as well as I'm speaking from my personal experince). BUT DON'T STOP THERE....

Part of my other problem with DAK is the layout of the rides / attractions. There's one major thing to see in each land. There is no supporting cast. Add smaller rides to fill the areas out.

So in addition to the Spiderman clone, add the carosel here (dragons, unicorns, & other mythical animals replace the horses similar to the carosuesel at IOA). Top it off with a Hercules themed dark ride.

Any thoughts?

[All Aboard]

I have to join this thread. Last week I summarized my thoughts on Dinoland on the whole. Somewhat disappointing was my conclusion. Another trip to Dinoland over the weekend changed my perspective a little. While I still feel that Dinosaur could be SO much better, I have softened a bit on my dislike for Dinorama.

We rode Triceratop Spin again. This time I took a much closer look at it. It really is a nice attraction. Just like the old toy tops, the pushrod goes up and down, burning comets circle in the opposite direction of your travel, and when full speed is reached, the vents on the top (just like the toy) open to reveal more dinos that bop up and down. For a spinner, it's a really great spinner.

Primeval Whirl is going to be a fun attraction. I doubt I'll be able to keep Nat off it, much like the Barnstormer. For those asking about the "two" coasters Reverchon referenced. It appears that the Whirl will be a pair of identical tracks, side by side much like the Space Mountain setup. As of Sunday, one track was nearly complete, the other just getting started.

As for the carnival games... like Pirate said, there is absolutely no pressure and everyone seemed to really enjoy them. For the most part, there is a winner for every game. The only exceptions are a wiffle ball toss (which seems to have a fairly decent winning percentage) and the swing-the-mallet-ring-the-bell game. For that one, you have a pretty good idea going in if you are going to win or not. Pair those features with the fact that it's Disney CM's working them and it's not too bad. I don't hate them, I'll put it that way.

Pirate put it well to me as we were strolling through the halls of AKL on Saturday night. If you already like AK and have kids, Dinorama is a perfect addition. But if you don't really like AK, Dinorama will likely not draw you into the park.

It'll take BK for that. I'm still very hopeful that it will arrive.

[Another Voice]

Perhaps I see the Mouse’s World through different eyes than many of the participants on these boards.

Maybe it was the circumstances of my experiences with Disneyland, that once-a-year trip discussed for months in advance. Maybe it’s too much wall hanging by one fly. Or maybe it’s just my current job. More and more these days, Hollywood is an industry built on the lowest common denominator. It’s a place where people earnestly strive simply to be “just good enough” and where a project is successful if it’s just not as bad as people were expecting.

I stayed with Disney for so many years because it was one of the few places where that kind of thinking wasn’t allowed. There was a palpable pressure to do more and to be better; to do it right the first and every time. To build and improve; to be ambitious and to strive. It was a blend of pride & joy in creation — and it felt great.

I look at things like Dino-Rama and I struggle to find that sense of energy there, or find any desire to amaze. I do not feel the childlike wonder that created the vistas at DisneySeas or the love of showmanship that went into ‘Tower of Terror’. Yes many people will like, some will even love it. But most people will see it simply because it’s there. And it will leave no lasting impression.

To me, Disney is not about customer service levels or the number of trinkets I can buy or the number of free appetizers I’m given; or formerly free valet parking, or lack of cut-ours, or any of the hundreds of trivial items we whine about on these boards. Disney is about the power of imagination and the wonders that people can create. I want Disney to make me stop in my tracks with awe like they’ve been able to do so many times in the past (and occasionally in the present). It does not have to be with big sweeping vistas – the little moments can be even more powerful. The scope of the project doesn’t matter, but the effort put into it does.

To read that it’s okay that Disney simply delivers “the tried and true” for children is perhaps the most disheartening quote I’ve seen around here. If anyone needs to shown that imagination can be a powerful, wonderful, tangible force in the world – it is children. And perhaps some adults need that lesson as well.

I suspect that this thread will continue about the great “themeing” of the place, the “details” stapled to the carny rides, how the games really aren’t as bad as people thought they were going to be. And I’m sure that the word “magical” will be thrown around a lot. So be it. But I would bet in ten years there won’t be a single child with a warm memory of the place.

[cindyfan]

I also need to jump in on this thread....simply because AK is my DD (10 yrs) favorite park. She HATES Dinosaur but LOVES Kali River. And she would ride the safari all day if we let her.
We are very excited to experience a new addition to AK when we return in June. she was disappointed in Oct when Dino-rama was not open yet.
We also take the wait and see approach.....but from what we have heard....I think it is something the whole family will enjoy. I also think it is a great addition to the whole "50's Godzilla and B movie" theme that they have already going on in Dinoland!!
I can already tell that I will have to drag DH and DD away from those "carny" games.
As far as paying "premium" prices......I really don't think WDW is any more expensive that any other park....whether it is a theme park or amusement park. I have said this before......WDW is right in line with the prices all the parks charge. For example: Cedar Point here in Ohio has just raised their one day pass to $42 for next season.....and all that is there is a bunch of rollercoasters and spinning rides.
So considering the prices of hopper passes.......WDW is quite a deal.......IMHO!
Also, I don't think Dinorama was intended to "drive attendance". This area was planned long before the attendence really started to suffer. This is just an addition to AK....and I think a good one for the entire family.
No, AK is not for everyone. And if you don't already like AK then Dinorama probably won't change your mind. But that is why there
are four parks at WDW and why they have "hoppers". There is something for everyone!!!

[larworth]

I can separate the concept from the execution.…for a moment.

I think the concept of Dino-rama is great. It provides a totally different forum for imagineering to work it’s magic. The rest of Dino-land has a serious, scientific, imposing feel. It needs to maintain some sense of formality to work. Dino-rama can be an outlet for humor, whimsy, the odd, and potentially the bizarre. A place where some creative license could be taken and would probably be the norm. Pardon the reference, but a Suessland in constrast to a Jurrasic Park.

However, fantasy should have imitated real life here. These tourist traps were never located in full view of the natural attractions they feed off. For good reason, because the contrast in styles was too big a clash. Having Dino-rama located as is, detracts from the immersive quality of each theme. Almost like having Tomorrowland merge into Frontierland with no segway (bad show). When you enter there really should have been a fork in the road. One set of makers directing you to the serious sights of Dino-land, and a set of billboards hoping to entice you into Dino-rama (an exit down the road).


On to the attractions:

In isolation there is nothing wrong with T Spin. It is a very well done spinner. However, was another spinner really what they believed most kids wanted, or did they settle for another since it was cheaper to duplicate (Aladdin).

I traveled out West a lot as a kid and never remember there being carnival games at any of these roadside type attractions. One might argue they fit into the theme of Paradise Pier, but they really are not indigenious to this venue.

We would have ridden the Whirl if it had been open, as well. However, is it really too much to ask them to at least TRY to do something original with this ride? Putting in a Hulk clone would have been the same level of effort, but somehow probably would be getting a different reaction.

***

Yes, it is only a complimentary addition. Yes, many people will find it enjoyable. However, it also seems clear that a lower set of standards/ambitions were accepted.

[space42]

what do you mean by the fake wild mouse model aside?

[All Aboard]

Not sure that it's a fake. Other than there only being one side, it pretty much looks like the track layout I saw when riding Triceratop Spin the day before yesterday. As to the adorning decor, that's not there yet.

[space42]

If you go to http://www.wdwmagic.com/dino-rama.htm and look at the latest construction pics , you can see some of the cut out decorations. These also seem to match the model exactly. If the model were a fake, how would they have prior knowledge of the decor? (the model pic was put up a few days before any of the decor was put on) And furthermore, why would someone go through the troble of faking a model anyway?

Scoop seems to know something, but he isn't saying :)

[Another Voice]

“Yet, so many people look back at Dumbo as their defining memory”

Exactly my point. Wonder does not depend on sear size, on cutting-edge technology, on elaborate mechanical gadgets, or on glitter & hype. It’s that gnawing sense of excitement in the pit of your stomach – and that comes from something else.

A defining moment – on ‘Star Tours’, just before you join the fighters to fly over the Deathstar, the robot pilot makes the comment, “I’ve always wanted to do this!”. That line is in there for a very specific reason. The designer of that attraction was thinking long and hard about what made a Disney attraction special. To him it wasn’t the thrills, the animation, the physical aspects of the ride – his answer was the line he wrote for the character. Sailing with pirates, wandering through a haunted house, or meeting a favorite character – that’s the “something else” that’s the difference between the Disney attractions between a boat ride, a dark ride-through and a spinner.

The are probably thousands of spinner rides in the country – but the only one that generates “defining memories” is Disney’s ‘Dumbo’. Without the background of the character, it’s nothing but a ride. Without the ride, it’s nothing but a fiberglass elephant. Combined in the mind of child – it’s magic. Find me even one seven year-old that hasn’t wanted to fly after seeing that movie. That’s the ride’s “I’ve always wanted to…”.

And that’s what Dino-Rama is lacking. There is no longing to fly on the back of a pink triceratops. There is no longing for tacky roadside carnivals. There is no “I’ve always wanted to do this!” to be satisfied by the place. In the end it’s machinery that produces a momentary physical thrill. Pleasant enough, but those kinds of minor amusements are the niche for church carnivals and county fairs.

Disney can do better. Worse, they know they can do better but choose not to.

[Peter Pirate]

AV, I don't disagree that I want Disney to push to new heights, but you are absolutely right that our experiences, where we come from, what we've been through, what we're looking for and the depth of our passions will always make most of our discussions, even the specific ones somewhat subjective. I know DinoRama was inexpensive...Just like the MGM Hat, but they both work for me due to the whimsy in their nature, their good natured bright colors and the ridiculousness of it all. Did any imagineer really think that a Big Hat would ever be consdered a "breakthrough"? I doubt it, but I'll bet they thought it was funny / or fun to put tgether something so outrageous as a big hat to serve as the MGM icon & headquarters for Walt's birthday...Walt is probably smiling. As for DinoRama, I get the joke and I think it's funny...Chester & Hester in prehistoric times seems real funny to me (obviously lame to others)...But how do we explain kitsch? Why do we still love Jungle Cruise or Smal World when they are really so bad given today's capabilities. Should we tear them down and redo them? No, of course not. We love the Jungle Cruise not because it was cutting edge at one time, but because it is quaint, whmsical...It's so out it's in. Can't the idea of Chester & Hester be just as good in time? Can't we look at it and see the irony of building the antithisis of what Walt hated about amusement parks of his day?

Also, I don't see the correlation that "tried & true" equals second rate. I see it as a decision to make the right fit. Perhaps by saving the huge amounts of imagineering budget at DinoRama they will be allowed to make BK just a little bit better or a little bit sooner than they otherwise could.

As to being able "to do better" well that is a debate that makes my hair stand on end (what a sight). Of course they could do theinkgs better. People could lways do things better. Walt could have done things better. Does that mean he always skimped? No, but he did on more than one occasion. There is nothing wrong with doing whats right for the situation even if "grander" could be done...


:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[Another Voice]

“Better” is not the same as “grander” or even the same thing as “more expensive”. I am a firm believer in budgets and I’ve seen just as many project get in trouble from having too much money as from too little money. Truly creative thinking comes from turning weaknesses into strengths and from overcoming obstacles. That’s not to say that cheap is better either – it’s just that while both are needed, creative effort is often more important than cash.

My point is not to say that people shouldn’t like this place, or that it’s “bad” or that it’s “second rate”. My point is that taking carnival rides and decorating them as carnival rides is – at its very best – unimaginative and derivative. Whether one finds this kitschy or tacky, whimsical or tawdry is a matter of personal taste. But certainly one can judge the level of effort put into the design.

“Do better” does not always mean spending more money or building larger. It means trying harder, failing sometimes and succeeding other times, but always trying. There is everything wrong with Disney doing “just enough” for a situation – they should never strive to be just adequate. People do not travel thousands of miles to see just adequate. No one is inspired by just adequate. No one is impassioned by just adequate.

One comment got my hair raised as well. Building the antithesis of everything that Walt Disney tried to create is not ironic – it’s pathetic. With fifty years of experience and resources that were fantasy in Walt’s day – all that can be accomplished is an act of self parody? Sad, very sad.

And let me answer the “so out it’s in” description about Dino-Rama by paraphrasing a line from ‘Ghost World’ – it’s so bad that it just goes right through “so bad it’s good” and comes all the way around to being ‘”just bad” again.

[JeffJewell]

...forgive me a quick ramble off-topic.

I was flipping channels last night and came across one of those Rankin-Bass stop motion Christmas exploitation specials from the seventies; I can never keep the names straight on those things: this was the one with Heat Miser and Snow Miser, not Yukon Cornelius or the Winter Warlock.

I watched pretty much the whole thing for two reasons: first, I've been deathly sick and simply did not have anything better to do that I was physically able to accomplish, and second, because I like singing along to "He's Mister Heat Miser, he's Mister Sun. He's Mister Green Christmas, he's Mister Hundred-and-One."

I remember watching these pieces o' crap when they were first on... even as kids we could tell that these were poorly made shows, but they were on during prime time at a time of my life when there was a lot of family tv watching going on; family tv watching that was even loaded with particular excitement at that time of year.

Because of the time and place I first experienced these things, they mean something to me. Rankin-Bass was simply looking to get some advertising money out of the commercialization of the season, and it just so happened that it resulted in something special being set off inside of me. It's part of the magic (lower case "m," in this case) of life that conditions conspire to make the ordinary mean more than that to some individual.

It's true that something very ordinary can sometimes become magical to some individual.

Some of you may have realized that I saw this particular production on the spakin' new ABC Family channel. In other words, these low-budget advertising vehicles now have the official stamp of Disney Magic on them.

Is that what Disney Magic has come to mean? "We own so much ordinary stuff that you are sure to stumbled across an emotional attachment to some of it, somewhere in your life?"

No, that's not enough for me.

While Walt was alive Disney did a lot of different things in a lot of different directions, to a lot of different levels of success. But the goal was consistently significantly higher than "ordinary." I simply don't see the evidence anymore that Disney is aiming any higher than "ordinary," and I can get "ordinary" anywhere.

In the case of last night, for years, I _did_ get this exact, perfectly ordinary product from someone _other_ than Disney. Disney created zero Magic here, merely managed to ensure that they'd be the ones to pick up any crumbs of profit lingering around the thing.

Why does the "faked" Primeval Whirl model look so much like what's being built? Because the thing is 90% an out-of-the-box installation (true, there're going to be a few more dinos scattered about that you might find on the ride when it appears in your local Wal-Mart parking lot, but, then again, the carnies toss the thing up and down overnight, compared to the months and months Disney put into it).

Disney stopped shooting higher than "ordinary" when Tower of Terror was completed. Taken out of context, there would be no way to identify DinoRama as a Disney product; it's a generic, ordinary carnival.

There are some people who truly appreciated how out-of-the-ordinary Disney used to be; appreciated it to the point that it defined what "Disney" meant. I have seen a lot of attempted justifications and excuses for Disney abandoning that policy, but it doesn't change the fact that "Disney" no longer means "out-of-the-ordinary," it just means something ordinary that Disney is legally allowed to brand as their own.

What a pity.

Jeff

[HBK]

I know DinoRama was inexpensive...Just like the MGM Hat, but they both work for me due to the whimsy in their nature, their good natured bright colors and the ridiculousness of it all. Did any imagineer really think that a Big Hat would ever be consdered a "breakthrough"? I doubt it
Did you as a guest think that a carnival and a new ICON would be the only new attractions for Disney to push? Do you think people were filling out their customer cards saying "Gosh, I wish MGM had a new Icon. That Earfull tower just doesn't cut it".

I understand why the BAH was made. But don't make it seem like it's an attraction to be seen. Why not market every new topiary planted as a new attraction (I guess DCA is close with the farm). What about when they put up a Garage Door (The Mike & Sully Meet & Greet)?

Also, I don't see the correlation that "tried & true" equals second rate. I see it as a decision to make the right fit.
Who's right fit? The budgeteers or the people who are filling in the customer complaint cards?

Tried & True is fine if you're six flags and your tried & true are carnival games and lightly themed rides. Disney's tried & true are emersive experinces or rides, while simple in design, which provide emotional attachments to various forms of their content. If you're a new Disney park, you're competing with MK, MGM, EPCOT and to a lesser extent IOA. You don't cut corners and force you're will on people when it's obvious you have no connection to what people want in the first place. The attendance numbers at DAK show that the vision of a more relaxed paced theme park is not what the general public is looking for from Disney.

People are looking for what AV is describing....a theme park with such wonders that make them stop and gasp at what they've just seen...and emotional attachments which leave a lasting impression which is handed down from generation to generation. A simple carnival doesn't create those types of feelings in most people.
I also think it is a great addition to the whole "50's Godzilla and B movie" theme that they have already going on in Dinoland!!
Where is this theme prevalant?
As far as paying "premium" prices......I really don't think WDW is any more expensive that any other park....
As a park, no. It's great for locals. But as a vacation experince....WDW is on the pricy side. I'm not sure how someone could classify a 400 hotel room as affordable. Even the low end (See the caste system at work?) hotel rooms ring in around 100 on average. I can stay at a premium hotel for that cost per night.....not in line with your standard motels.
Also, I don't think Dinorama was intended to "drive attendance". This area was planned long before the attendence really started to suffer. This is just an addition to AK....and I think a good one for the entire family.
No, AK is not for everyone. And if you don't already like AK then Dinorama probably won't change your mind. But that is why there
are four parks at WDW and why they have "hoppers". There is something for everyone!!!
OK....we're on different paths. Reports & rumors are that Disney is waiting on offically greenlighting more expensive additions to see what effect Carnyland has on attendance at DAK. And the answer of "that's why they have hoppers" is the problem. People are using their hoppers and leaving DAK in droves. You seem to be on the path that DAK is fine and is not in emergency mode.

DAK cannot afford to be making "niche targeted" additions. They need the attendance numbers to be increased across the board. CarnyRama does not have that broad reaching appeal.

P.S. Since it's been determined that DAK isn't for everyone, where can I buy a park hopper pass for just the other three....that way I'm not paying for something that wasn't "for me"?

[HBK]

but I was writing as Jeff posted this:
Taken out of context, there would be no way to identify DinoRama as a Disney product; it's a generic, ordinary carnival.
Hey Peter et al.....if Carnyland was added to your local six flags, would you think it was just as magical?

They have one at my local six flags. Instead of being themed around dinosaurs, it's themed around looney toons. They've got a spinner, a little kiddy coaster & a bunch of other little rides. I'm not sure what Disney's added here that makes their carny area more magical than anyone elses. If we did what Jeff suggests, take DinoRama out of WDW and put it somewhere else, would it be considered magical? Or is it that DinoRama is hoping your too blinded from the pixie dust everywhere else to notice you're at a run of the mill carnival?

[DVC-Landbaron]

Like Roger Rabbit, I have been going through contortions reading this thread, but restraining myself at the same time. But now… I'm afraid… I cannot hold back any longer… so…

TWO BITS!!!!!!!

My consistent position has been that DinoRama is no different than ToonTown... not a "stand-alone" land or area...just a supplement.You hit the nail on the head. I agree wholeheartedly!! Are you surprised? You shouldn't be. I'm consistent as well. As an 'extra' I'm pleased as punch.

But there are two MAJOR problems with this area that overshadow the 'extra' aspect of the concept. First, it really isn't an extra. Not totally. An extra, in my way of thinking at least, is something added to something that is… well… I guess you'd have to say… COMPLETE!!! And I think that if the passengers of all the cars agree on anything it is that AK is far from complete!

The second problem I have with this concept is a little more esoteric. And it points to their philosophy regarding the SHOW. And more importantly how they view the 'Disney" standard. If this were truly an 'extra', it would be that 'little something' in a long line of E-Ticket concepts (not rides particularly, but ideas) that have been just gushing forth from our beloved Disney. But it isn't. It IS a stand alone concept. A quick fix. Done on the cheap, with little or no regard for the "Disney Standard". And very little thought about the long term effect this type of concept has on that standard. It really is "Just good enough".

And to further that second concept, it is indicative as to their thinking and reasoning regarding everything they do. From DCA, to AK, to "pretty little spinners", to Imagination, to "Parades as attractions", to ride closures, to resort closures, to EE elimination to… I think you get the point.

So I agree Scoop. Alone, in a perfect Disney World, where everything just gushes "EXCELLENCE", Dinorama would be acceptable and welcome as the little "B" ticket extra that it is. But given their recent track record, and their blatant disregard of the very quality that put them on the map in the first place, Dinorama is just more of the same mundane sh** they've been giving us for years now. But what's really sad, to me at least, is the far reaching rationalization that takes place in the minds of some Disney fans. That is something I cannot understand at all!!

[DVC-Landbaron]

many of the recently flamed WDW offerings have ended up being applauded by even the most unusual suspects (i.e. the parades, one man's dream, etc.)Ya know Scoop, the one thing I've tried to do on these boards is remain consistent. That is why I firmly believe that you must define the Disney philosophy or 'standard' before you judge any particular item. And you must not EVER lose sight of the big picture. In other words you need to know what the baseline really is.

So just because some more people than usual have a positive attitude about a particular 'something' doesn't necessarily make it fit within that 'standard' we strive to define. It may be nice. It may even be good. But it might not be "Disney". I know it's a bit subjective, but it's the best I can do. It's the best we all can do. Either something is 'Disney' or it's not. And there are some gray areas which could go either way, depending on what's in the 'big picture'. Confused? I was. Until I absolutely, thoroughly and unconditionally defined that Standard and what it means to me. Subjective? Sure!! But it's the only thing I have to go on.

I picture myself as Walt (or Ei$ner) and consider each decision and/or rumor as if I was truly in control. The head mouse!! Would I do it? Or not? Would it sink or swim. All within the 'Standard' I have defined, that hopefully (if I have any intuitive Disney sense at all) mirrors what Walt set down for himself. I don't consider cost. I don't consider profit. All I consider is how it affects the SHOW!! Later I may change an opinion due to realistic business concerns, but first and foremost is the 'Standard'. The SHOW!!!!

I'm sure we all could find something from every park built during each regime which we found un-Disney but which left a distinct mark on another WDWerTo me this sentence borders on gobblety-gook! You've left out the big picture again, and brought us down to a level of particulars that is ridiculously subjective. I never meant to imply that we should examine every corner of WDW and on its own merits, pixie dust must bleed from it. NO!!! There are too levels to deal with. For example the shooting gallery. IF Frontierland had only the River Boat, the Diamond Horseshoe Revue and the Canoes and they added the shooting gallery I'd say, "It was well below the Disney 'standards' and when will the executives wake up!!!!" However, being built within a well themed area, teeming with rides galore, the shooting gallery suddenly transforms from a "Too little; Too late" cheap, quick fix, into a pleasant 'extra' that adds charm and character to a theme that simply dazzles the senses!!!

So if you forget the 'Big Picture' it's very easy to criticize the Shooting Gallery. And one might be tempted to draw a parallel with it to Dinorama. Don't you see how wrong that would be? But also, don't you see how hard it is to mount a defense against that type of analogy? On the surface it seems sooooo right. But they really couldn't be further apart.

I guess the same could be said of your analogy (only in the reverse): IMHO, yes, there has been a lull but it is not rationalizing to believe that DinoRama is every bit as Disneyish as the Barnstormer or Mickey/Minnie's housesAgain. If you take any particular and hold it up by itself, very few could pass muster. You've once again, left the "Big Picture" out of the equation.

And the big picture, for me at least, is that AK is nowhere near complete!! We can't start adding the garnish (which I consider the Shooting Gallery as well as Dinorama) until we at least know what the main course is!! If they do, Disney will become a parody of the old commercial "Where's the Beef!?!?" Ak doesn't have much beef yet.

And all the above doesn't even start to tackle the more elusive questions that AV brought up. I read his posts within this thread and the other with a head nodding so fast it was hard to keep the words in focus. I really felt the need to re-post them, in their entirety, just to be sure that everyone really read them. But, as I have a tendency to be too wordy in the first place I narrowed my aim a little. I found that two paragraphs really struck me. So with out further ado, I present thoughts from Another Voice, in my post!! (Hey! Maybe this should be regular feature of my posts!!!?? You know, an AV quote of the day!!)To me, Disney is not about customer service levels or the number of trinkets I can buy or the number of free appetizers I'm given; or formerly free valet parking, or lack of cut-ours, or any of the hundreds of trivial items we whine about on these boards. Disney is about the power of imagination and the wonders that people can create. I want Disney to make me stop in my tracks with awe like they've been able to do so many times in the past (and occasionally in the present). It does not have to be with big sweeping vistas - the little moments can be even more powerful. The scope of the project doesn't matter, but the effort put into it does.

My point is not to say that people shouldn't like this place, or that it's "bad" or that it's "second rate". My point is that taking carnival rides and decorating them as carnival rides is - at its very best - unimaginative and derivative. Whether one finds this kitschy or tacky, whimsical or tawdry is a matter of personal taste. But certainly one can judge the level of effort put into the design Thanks AV!! Well said!!! ;)

[larworth]

I don't think the point is pre or post BK, but is it more the exception or the rule these days. I'm sure you have read AV's last post on the other thread. Sums it up for me.

I would hope all of us would overlook the occasional sub-standard effort. However, when occasional turns into often, I think it is fair to say we have a trend. If we could every get past whether the trend is clear or not, than maybe there could be a debate about whether this is the right approach. Like any business the customer ultimately defines success. Maybe, the old business model was too heavy on wow and amaze and left too much money on the table by not settling for nice and fun more often.

That would not be my contention, but it could be argued. I also wouldn't go this direction as it is a dangerous mindset. I will only train hard half the time, because I only plan on doing my best in the big races. Just doesn't work that well.

***

You must have missed my earlier Dino-Rama report.

As a concept, it had a lot of potential. I like the big dinosaurs and the bright colors. I don't like where it is located and how it clashes with the rest of Dino-land. It really needs some transition space. TS is a well themed spinner. If not for Aladdin, I would have less of a problem with it, but it was the easy way out. The carney games don't belong here (or anywhere else). I'm disappointed in the effort they are putting into PW. They could have made a really cool, novel ride experience with it, if they had tried.

Not a big CoP person either. However, is there a question that when it was built it exemplified Disney standards.

[Another Voice]

One wonders if people are discussing Toontown-WDW or Toontown-Disneyland. One is a one-year marketing event that lives on because there is no corporate will to tear it down or to do it right. The other is a fully realized land, with thought and caring, fully formed and realized. You see – effort does make all the difference.

And it’s an extremely dangerous argument to justify today’s shortcomings by claiming they are no worse than yesterday’s shortcomings.

There’s a big-time producer around town that creates his movie in a unique way (this is a true story). After they get a script, his staff tacks all the pages up on the walls and highlights in red every time there is a fight or something blows up. After the highlighting is done, he looks at the wall. If there isn’t a red mark every five pages, they rip out the fifth page and create a scene where something blows-up. It doesn’t matter what, it doesn’t matter why. It’s just that something has to go up in flames every five minutes. The movies this guy makes always stink, but more often than not he used to make money at it.

I have this mental movie of a design meeting in a conference room high in the Team Disney Burbank building: “Looking at the walls, that park needs something for the kiddies. It doesn’t matter what, it doesn’t matter why.”

“Because more often than not, we’ll make money from it.”

[Captain Crook]

And it's an extremely dangerous argument to justify today's shortcomings by claiming they are no worse than yesterday's shorcomings.
Why? When the reason the shortcomings of the past are generally brought up is in direct response to those who criticize Eisner/current management by comparing them to the past.

Walt wanted what he wanted and he gave us what he wanted to give us. He admittedly cut corners when he had to. They opened DL without enough drinking fountains (purposly) to force soft drink purchases and rushed to meet the announced opening date of DL despite he fact that the Park was still a construction zone in many aspects.

gcurling put it nicely when he described how nicely the TS is themed. It does look like a spinning top with lots of detail & surprise for the kiddies (is there somethng that makes this theming less accountable?) & the mouse coaster will be fun for (almost) everyone (excluding those big coaster fans & those expecting more and not willing to accept other than their expectations foster under the guise of 'Disney quality').

Walt's main goal was to build a place where the whole family could have fun without exclusion of each other. DinoRama helps AK further fit that bill. AK is a great Park and while attendance is down and customer disatisfaction seems high, does that really seem strange to you? After all America is full of lemmings and the current trend is coasters, coasters, coasters...Something Walt wouldn't have approved too much of, I think. AK is a high quality Park full of the type of things Walt would be proud of, DR included.

The thing about AK attendance that can't really be quantified is that AK is the 4th gate. Add to that the premise that it is a passive Park with quite obviously no intention of ever becoming an evening Park (due to the animal attractions and supported by the lack of sit down restaurants). Disney built AK as an added possibility for its guests and immediately withdrew he three day hoppers for four (smart move). Whether you think AK is a full day Park is irrelevent although the fact that you now must by a four day hoper is relevent. That said, you don't have to visit AK. You can save that day for anoter trip - which never bothers Disney or simply visit the other Parks again - which doesn't bother Disney either. But enough of the AK is incomplete line. Just because "people" don't prefer it to MK means little and when people say they prefer IOA to AK I say who cares? Look at the whole picuture. How many people prefer IOA/USF over WDW - compare total package to total package.
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[JeffJewell]

"And it's an extremely dangerous argument to justify today's shortcomings by claiming they are no worse than yesterday's shorcomings." Why? ...for a couple main reasons; first, that it takes the worst of Disney's history and uses it as a benchmark of current performance. It's a dangerous business move to ask no more than the worst anyone's ever done at the job, whatever that job might be. Also, in another sense, it's dangerous to compare specific business decisions from two different periods of time because there are too many external factors operating to make a legitimate comparison possible.When the reason the shortcomings of the past are generally brought up is in direct response to those who criticize Eisner/current management by comparing them to the past. Speaking for myself anyway, I've always compared business philosophies rather than specific decisions; again, different times make the specific decisions too dissimilar to meaningfully compare.He admittedly cut corners when he had to. To me, the key difference is in that "had to." True, Walt opened Disneyland, and WDW, for that matter, in a state less complete than he envisioned, because he was still a relatively small businessman blazing some new trails. This is one of those cases where no meaningful comparison can be drawn to the decision to cut corners while you're dropping $5 billion on a cable network. Hell, the _refund_ Eisner got off of that deal would have made an impressive addition to Animal Kingdom.

Trying to compare Eisner's corner-cutting decisions to Walt's completely falls apart when looked at in context. Walt gave us Dumbo because he "had to;" in the sense that he needed more capacity and simply couldn't afford to buy anything more. Eisner gave us DinoRama because he "had to;" in the sense that everyone was complaining that there was nothing to do in his park and the place was a ghost town after lunchtime. Two entirely different business philosphies.DinoRama helps AK further fit that bill. While I'm certainly glad you enjoy what's open so far, I think it's a little early to declare categorically what effect DinoRama as a whole has had on Animal Kingdom (I know it's equally anecdotal evidence as yours, but my sister, her husband, and their two-year-old daughter were flying point for our carvan coming out of Tarzan Rocks, came to the point where a superflous rope in the exit path turned all Tarzan escapees directly toward DinoRama, saw TS, and decided it was time to go to Magic Kingdom for Dumbo again).AK is a great Park and while attendance is down and customer disatisfaction seems high, does that really seem strange to you? After all America is full of lemmings and the current trend is coasters, coasters, coasters Well, I can agree that AK has some great _parts_, but it's clearly a flawed and incomplete "theme park," by any business standard (and apparently, most vacationers' standards), so the trends don't seem strange, at all. And besides, Eisner is still treating people like lemmings, just lemmings who must want spinners, spinners, spinners.AK is a high quality Park full of the type of things Walt would be proud of, DR included. Actually, Walt was against a live animal park. Well, perhaps "against" is the wrong word, he did orignally want live animals on the Jungle Cruise, but the business reality of the expense of keeping live animals made Jungle Cruise an AA showplace. Live animals made it difficult to turn a profit, and Disney ended up not doing it, back then.

And although I do agree that Walt might have been proud of DinoRama, that would have been in the late sixties... an appropriate time to be excited about managing to "plus" some carnival rides enough to have something vaguely worthy of being put in your fledgling park. Three decades later, with (I find myself compelled to point out again) $5 billion worth of jack lying around, I believe Walt would have been made ill by such a suggestion.How many people prefer IOA/USF over WDW - compare total package to total package. We were talking about DinoRama and got to this? Are you saying DinoRama is clearly of Disney quality because it fails to make WDW, as a whole, a less preferred destination than IOA/USF?

You appear to set your sights eye-poppingly low, my Captain.

Jeff

[Another Voice]

“Walt wanted what he wanted and he gave us what he wanted to give us.”

“AK is a great Park and while attendance is down and customer dissatisfaction seems high, does that really seem strange to you?”

Interesting quotes, since it seems that Walt knew what the general public would respond to. And the fact that the current management was compelled to force the public into visiting Animal Kingdom using the four-day ticket scheme (a “good move”). Interesting how the public aren’t following that particular plan…

There is one catch in being in the mass entertainment industry – you have to provide entertainment for the masses. Whining that the public is stupid, or they don’t get it, or they’re not worthy of it, or that they don’t know quality, all of that frankly doesn’t sell any tickets. The better part of my day is listening to people boast about how talented they are and how dumb the American public is for not recognizing that “fact”. I’ve heard just about every conceivable rationalization to avoid admitting the truth – no one likes the movie.

The public isn’t stupid, the public isn’t a pack of lemmings willing only to accept the lowest common denominator, the public isn’t incapable from separating hype from substance. And while I have more than a few issues with the public’s taste from time to time, they do have some level of expectations that have to be met. There is a level of expectation about something labeled “Disney’s”, and The Company has to meet it or face the kind of response they receive daily about Animal Kingdom.

Whether you or I think the park is a full-day experience really is irrelevant. The public seems to have that expectation, and it’s not being met. Calling them names or trying to knock them down a few rungs on the evolutionary ladder won’t increase attendance. Walt succeeded by exceeding the public’s expectations. The current management seems determined to browbeat the public into accepting what little The Company is willing to deliver.

And the public is voting with their dollars which management style they prefer.

[JeffJewell]

Whether you think AK is a full day Park is irrelevent although the fact that you now must by a four day hoper is relevent. That said, you don't have to visit AK. ...there's only one way this all makes sense. Captain Crook has basically pointed out that the important thing about opening Animal Kingdom was to give an excuse to drop the three day hoppers and force the purchase of the extra day for the alledged fourth park; beyond that, who care's if it's enough of a park to make people want to go see it? I can't imagine any fan, even a rose-goggled one, celebrating that kind of reasoning behind park design.

Those lines would only really make sense coming from an insider; someone whose fortunes were tied to hopper sales in some way.

I've also been wondering about the whole Peter Pirate/Captain Crook thing, the way they appear to be two people, but but are sometimes similar enough that we regard them as the same person on the boards... and I remember the speculation about Disney insiders being on the boards... and I thought of a couple particular insiders with a two person/one mind relationship... then the Pirate's initials conked me on the head and I realized what should have been so obvious so long ago; that Peter Pirate is Paul Pressler and Captain Crook is none other than Michael Eisner himself.

I do hope they all continue to post despite being outed... ;)

Jeff

[DVC-Landbaron]

then the Pirate's initials conked me on the head and I realized what should have been so obvious so long ago; that Peter Pirate is Paul Pressler and Captain Crook is none other than Michael Eisner himself. GOOD GOD MAN!!! You're right!! It's soooo obvious!!! I don't know why we didn't see it before!!! ;)

Give it up, Peter, Paul, Pirate or Mike Crook or whatever your name is!! You secret identity is no longer secret!!

[Captain Crook]

Landbaron, then who was that guy you met at the Dolphin?

Jeff, I wasn't celebrating anything (the switch from 3 to 4 day hoppers), just pointing out what transpired and why it was a good decision. What I'm trying to say is that with advent of hoppers and their wide use, I don't believe being a "full day Park" pers se, is relevent anymore. In fact how can AK ever be what you guys would consider full day when they obviously have no plans to ever stay open past dark? No late nigt eateries, no fireworks, etc. The nature of the Park makes it another choice for the guest Disney covets, the multi day guest.

I do see a glitch in that a good number of peope are using a day of their Disney time & scooting over to IOA. This reflects badly on AK number wise (perhaps), but in reaity the only thing that would stop the bulk of this "defection" would be a coaster Park, so AK is really unto itself & I truly believe (unlike DCA apparently) that AK has no big worries. Heck, the recently released attendance fgures don't show a huge drop in numbers from Epcot to AK. From these 2001 numbers it appears to me that WDW's biggest attendance concern has to be Epcot.
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[JeffJewell]

just pointing out what transpired and why it was a good decision...I know; I was just jerking your chain a bit for how mercenary it sounded... to me, anyway.In fact how can AK ever be what you guys would consider full day when they obviously have no plans to ever stay open past dark? No late nigt eateries, no fireworks, etc. The nature of the Park makes it another choice for the guest Disney covets, the multi day guest. Ah, but what you are describing as almost a commandment, I consider to be a big(albeit correctable, should the inclination be there to correct it) mistake about the way they built and run Animal Kingdom.

Why _can't_ the place stay open later?

There need be no fireworks display (nor even afternoon parade, but that's another issue) to keep people around AK, but there does need to be _some_ reason. I think they missed the boat on two fronts: first, they failed to take the opportunities of the varied cultures already represented in AK (not to mention the lush surroundings already being built for Safaris and Trails and Jungle Treks) by opening a couple excellent restaurants. Put me on the PS list now to eat in the ruins as tigers walk by the Coral Reef-esque wall-sized windows into the habitats. Tigers are nocturnal, you know, actually quite likely to provide evening meal entertainment as their daytime naps subside. Which leads to missed boat number two, the opportunity to take advantage of the different daily cycles of different species to create evening displays that highlight some of the wildlife that isn't typically featured in a close-at-sundown zoo. Be NAHTAZU in a clearly superior way.From these 2001 numbers it appears to me that WDW's biggest attendance concern has to be Epcot. I'd agree with you there. It's likely that the rumored next celebration (100 years of flight, right?) will have the pin trading centered back at Epcot, which might be enough. Disney Studios was the one park that was packed every single time we went in, earlier this month... I figured the pin trading must have had something to do with it... although come to think of it, Regis and Kelly were there some of those days, too...

Jeff

[HBK]

Jeff, I wasn't celebrating anything (the switch from 3 to 4 day hoppers), just pointing out what transpired and why it was a good decision
Good decision for whom? I hope you don't mean the guest.
In fact how can AK ever be what you guys would consider full day when they obviously have no plans to ever stay open past dark? No late nigt eateries, no fireworks, etc. The nature of the Park makes it another choice for the guest Disney covets, the multi day guest.
Uhm, how about something with enough to do that I can spend the park's operating hours at the park I paid for.
I do see a glitch in that a good number of peope are using a day of their Disney time & scooting over to IOA. This reflects badly on AK number wise (perhaps), but in reaity the only thing that would stop the bulk of this "defection" would be a coaster Park, so AK is really unto itself & I truly believe (unlike DCA apparently) that AK has no big worries.
OK this quote has many turns and addressable points.

My first question is this....have you been to IOA? There are only 3 Coasters in the whole park (4 if you count Dueling Dragons as two, which I don't agree with). Spiderman, Jurassic Park, Popeye & Bluto, are all different style rides. So why do you feel WDW would have to open a park of coasters to compete? The fact is IOA is a well built, well imagined, well funded theme park. Take a look. Curling did and enjoyed it. Give it a shot and then try to compare it to WDW and DAK.

The fact you don't feel that Animal Kingdom has serious problems shows a bit of your arguement is based on personal opinion. Whether you enjoy the park, think it's a full day experince, etc doesn't address the fact that attendance has been dwindling at Animal Kingdom. Nothing of any great value has been added to the park to drive attendance upwards. I know you think Dino Rama is nice, but is it a special enough addition to turn attendance around? Or is it another in the long line of addittions which relies on your acceptance of the Disney brand?

I believe AV when he says the company is worried about DAK.

[Another Voice]

“I don't believe being a "full day Park" per se, is relevant anymore”

It is when all your spreadsheets are built around all those happy quests spending hour after hour in your shops and restaurants (Animal Kingdom). It is when you build a park that doesn’t benefit from park hopping (California Adventure).

And it certainly matters to your guests when you charge the same price for a pleasant morning as you do for the two-day parks just up the road. I keep reading all of these rationalizations that keep excluding one important point – giving the people what they expect. What’s truly isn’t relevant anymore is whatever business model the place was designed to – the public has rejected it and wants the old “there’s so much to see here” model they’ve grown accustomed to.

And, by the way, Animal Kingdom was designed for extended operations. The park has stayed open late on numerous occasions for private parties and special events (and in the very first a few late “test” closing). They’ve even run the safari tour at night from what I’m told. There were never plans to for fireworks due to the animals, but there were plans for a night parade. And while the deal to get Rainforest Café to pay for their restaurant nixed an internal sit-down restaurant, most of the place inside have served dinner in the past.

The early closing are a completely home-grown problem. After the park opened (without Asia), Disney noticed that the place was empty by 2:00pm. It didn’t help that word quickly spread you had to see the safari first thing in the morning, before all the animals went into hiding from the blazing Florida sun. So the guests started to so up early and leave sooner too. The stores were even emptier than they were before.

So, what does a company do? Do you spend lots of money to make the place a true full-day experience? Do you spend some money to build a nighttime “weenie” to keep the guests in the park (like ‘Fantasminc!’). Or you close up shop early and save money.

Disney chose to act like a shopping mall.