Disappointing News - Primeval Whirl

[All Aboard]

I found out today that the height requirement for Primeval Whirl will be set at 48 inches. Yes, the same restrictive requirement that is in place for Rock n Roller Coaster. Seems as though the strongest proponents of Dinorama have been the folks that say that it adds more the whole family can do together. As it was coming out of the ground, it sure looked like a family-fun type coaster. Oh well, I guess Natalie can look forward to riding it in about 4 years.

So, it begs the question, does Disney think that Primeval Whirl will satisfy the "not enough thrill rides at WDW" crowd??? If you go to the AK web page on Disney's site, PW is listed under "Thrills". Does this mean that PW is the replacement for the Excavator?

This attraction seems to miss on all potential targets. It's a "coaster-lite", yet you have to be as tall as is required for Rock n Roller. I just don't get it.

[OnWithTheShow]

No scoop when you have a ride that is great fun but poor theming you have a sixflags quality attraction not a dilemma. Just look at the photos on www.wdwmagic.com and you will see the lack of theme, especially in queue.

[toefungus]

Why is it set at 48"? Is it that rough of a ride? It looks like a little kiddie rollercoaster, but I guess all the little kids will have to ride tricetops spin. :rolleyes: And BTW, it looks horrible. That looks like somting that they would put up at a local fair. :(

[hopemax]

Like I said in another thread, Kennywood has a spinning mad mouse and it's height requirement is 46" to ride, and I guess those 46"- 52" have to wear a seatbelt.

The mad mouse is an interesting thing. They look pretty tame, but the lack of banked turns and speed means the ride has a lot of lateral G's. Basically you slam from one side of the car to the person sitting next to you, so it's pretty rough, and little kids would get smushed by an adult pretty easily. I don't know what the spinning does to the ride.

[All Aboard]

My post has nothing to do with quality or theming and all to do with target market and intent of the attraction. The question is - just what is this attraction? Is it a family ride, a thrill ride, what? Who is intended to please?

From the start, I assumed that it was a family attraction. Yet, WDW plants it's most restrictive height requirement at any of the 4 theme parks on it.

We are a family of three. A thrill-averse, motion sickness likely mom, a thrill is plenty fine dad and a 42 inch tall thrill seeking daughter. Well WDW is batting .333 on this one with us. Oh well, that gets you in the Hall of Fame.

So, it seems to fail on the "prefer attractions the whole family can enjoy together camp." I'll make Lesley the chairperson of that group (after reading her posts in the Horizons thread.)

Will it succeed with the "we have too many family rides, we need more thrill rides" camp? Of course, BobO is the chairperson of that group.

[Another Voice]

The “target market” for Primeval Whirl is not families, it’s not thrill seekers, and it’s really not the guests. The target market is a PowerPoint presentation that said one of the biggest guest complaints about Animal Kingdom is that “there’s not enough to do”. Primeval Whirl is the most cost effective way of checking off that item.

Animal Kingdom has had attendance problems since it opened. It failed to attract new visitors to WDW and it’s failed to retain the existing guests after their first visit. Florida was given orders to fix the problem and a flood of polltakers laid siege to DAK’s gate. Whether or not you think “it’s a half day park” or not doesn’t matter, the attendance problem exists whatever one’s personal opinion about the park.

One of Disney’s dirty little secrets is the concept of “perceived value”. When Disney switched from individual ride tickets to passports they faced a marketing problem: how many rides does a customer have to go on in a single day to get the perception they got their money’s worth? With tickets it was easy: the guests got exactly what they paid for. But with a “passport”, each guest started a stopwatch the moment they walked under the train station. A visit became a race to get on as many rides as possible. How many is enbugh?

Obviously, you can’t determine what that number is for each and every individual guest, so you estimate for the entire customer base. And it’s a number that doesn’t mean how many rides you build, it’s really used to determine the number of rides you open on any day, the park operating hours and the staffing levels of the attractions themselves (longer lines mean fewer rides in the day).

At the beginning (way back in the early 1980’s) both Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom were pegged at 13 rides. Shows and entertainment weren’t counted; they were “plusses” to the guests visit. Naturally, like any numerical target set for customer service, the target gets lowered over time. The cost of opening and running attractions, an over inflated sense of “brand value”, faulty comparisons of quality or size, and all the usual suspects that any customer-orientated company suffers from over time.

By the time Animal Kingdom and California Adventure opened, the magic number (according to rumors) stood at 6. Yes, you were supposed to get your full $50 or $43 value from seeing six attractions and shows (oh yes, shows are no longer a “plus”). Even Disney recognized that not every attraction is going to be interesting to every guest, so they built a few more than that just to make sure everyone got in their six. There were legions of MBA’s that poured over marketing data, guest surveys, and all kinds of spreadsheets. They were certain of the numbers.

One problem: Disney had lowered its perception of value, but their guests did not.

Take Disney’s response to a major problem at California Adventure – the place is a wasteland for children. The guests screamed up one side of Guest Relations and down the other side of City Hall. What was Disney’s initial response? They produced a handout listing the attractions for kids (including the tortilla making show) and denied – flat out denied – that there was a problem. They had spreadsheets – the spreadsheets can’t be wrong! We KNOW you’re going to get the value of a child’s admission because we can count the number of rides! Disney knew what “value” was, not their guests!!! It’s a merchandiser’s view: if the numbers are right, then everything is right.

After a while, it became apparent that millions of guests were missing. The parks were in trouble and something had to be done. The solution came once again from the merchandisers – maybe the number is really 7! The spreadsheets weren’t wrong, really, but maybe a little fine tuning was in order because Disney’s guests had become ungrateful (think about all the whining The Company is doing about per-guest spending in Tokyo versus here). So the goal became getting to 7 with the least possible cost. Hence, Dino-Rama in Florida, Flick’s Fun Fair in California (of the four kiddie rides, it’s rumored that two will be height restricted by the way).

Primeval Whirl is not the solution of a showman, it’s the solution of a shopping mall manager. It meets the quantitative requirement of a marketing survey, but it doesn’t meet the qualitative requirements that can’t be easily measured. All that matters is that the spreadsheet is completed. Whether you like the ride or not isn’t the issue. You’ll have your chance to catch seven attractions; your child has their seven. There is no problem.

Because the spreadsheet is right.

[airlarry!]

I notice that the SF papers are none too happy with DCA. They ask the rhetorical question, Why build a California park in California instead of Bejing?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/17/IN147298.DTL

Maybe because the spreadsheet said people would pay $43 for the six or seven attractions that DCA had...instead of "stick(ing) to what it does best: creating fantasies that excite children's imaginations." See above link.

[DisneyFanGuy]

AV, you have reached a new level of cynacism! LOL! I work in a "Powerpoint culture" and completely understand your point. The bigger the deck, the more data, the better. Often times, marketing data is "Massaged" to look better than it really is. The experts figure that nobody really understands it anyway.

Fortunately, eventually customers catch on. Usually though, the only way a "landlocked" company responds is by a leadership change. We are hoping.

[Lesley]

Hmmm...I thought this one might actually be fun (though once again our 2yo is left out) but now I'm wondering if it will make me sick. I love RnR...but that seems to be a better quality coaster.

And I've been appointed chairperson of the "prefers attractions the whole family can enjoy together" committee? Yikes...better be more careful about those late night rants!

AV's explanation seems to make sense to me....fits with what otherwise doesn't seem to make sense at all. :rolleyes:

[Bob O]

GCurling Im happy to be the chairperson of the Thrill Ride dept. When i ride a mad mouse i find them to be interesting coasters but not what i would call a thrill ride. The height limit seems a little high, we rode one at BuscH Gardens Williamsburg last year ands my daughter who was 44inches rode it numerous times and loved it. Im sure that due to lawsuits they will error on the side of being cautious.

AnotherVoice if Primeval Whirl was built for "Thrillseekers" than disney did another awful job of planning a ride for its target audience. It may be a thrill for disney but its nowhere close to being a thrillride for thrill seekers!!! I have always looked at mad mouse coasters to be family coasters and not a thrill coaster. If disney wanted a coaster for thrill seekers they would have one with at least a 200" ft drop or numerous inversions or a ride that would catapult you from 0-75mph in a heartbeat and a mad mouse coaster has none of these elements. I would agree that it was a ride that didnt cost much and could be put up quickly so as to add a attraction to the park. Another example of disney doing something on the cheap!! Alot of parks have these type of coasters because they are cheap to build as compared to a big coaster and it adds a coaster so they can use the number of coasters that they have in their pr campaigns.

[raidermatt]

AV, I don't know how many Disney Dollars you gave Show to keep quiet about your identity, but judging by the confidence you are exhibiting, it must have been a truckload...;)

Now, a few words from one of the moderate candidates...

Really, there are two levels of thrill rides. One is the kick-your-rear (KYA) type thrill ride, that our friend BobO is oh so fond of. (I am too, Bob). Examples of this would be Hulk, Dueling Dragons, Spiderman, Tower of Terror, maybe Terminator, that type of stuff. The other type offers tamer thrills. Not enough for the die-hard thrill seekers, but still enough that the squeamish won't ride them. This is stuff like Space Mountain, Dinosaur, and Big Thunder Mountain. Obviously, some rides are closer to the middle than others, but these classifications should do. Note that themeing and the "show", in and of themselves, are not a factor in this classification. If they contribute to and enhance the thrills fine, but this discussion isn't really about whether Disney still privides a "show", that's another topic.

So, what is PW, and does it belong in AK (again, only taking into account its "thrill" quotient)? Judging from the pictures and descriptions, PW would seem to be a tame thrill ride, and not a KYA thrill ride.

So does PW belong? Well, AK basically had two thrill rides prior to PW. Kali and Dinosaur. It's Tough is probably a borderline tame thrill, but I personally think its a notch below a true thrill attraction. So PW brings AK's total thrill to 3 relatively tame attractions. Generally, I think that's about the right number for a Disney park, though a larger park like MK can handle 4-6 without losing its family -friendly status.

That said, I think AK needs to be careful about its balance. Even with TS, there are still a limited number of family-type attractions. While Reign of Fire is an interesting rumor, I hope that even if it does materialize, it brings with it some non-thrill attractions, as the concept of AK is best suited to a family park, not a thrill park.

[Bob O]

Raidermatt I would agree with you that there are different degrees of thrill rides and what place you put the rides that you mentioned. Now keeping that in mind that park needs a real thrill ride that thrill seekers would love. If mgm can have 2 more thrilling thrill rides their is no reason that Ak cant at least have one, and the same would go for the rest of the parks.

[Barb]

The whole section back there looks like something you'd find in a local fair. It's just plain cheesy. I didn't get it when I first read about the idea and now that I've seen in first hand, I really don't get it. PW is a "wild mouse" rollercoaster just like I used to ride at Crystal Beach. And, I did think this section was supposed to be for the whole family, so why is the height requirement so high?? This is just a huge disappointment, IMHO.

[Captain Crook]

That's the point! It is supposed to look like a 'hucksters haven'. Don't you get it? Can't you grasp the irony? I think this is a brilliant idea (again with the assumption and belief that a real BK is forthcoming). Walt hated roadside carnivals for their dirty, in your face stye...Not because of the attractions. Walt knew that a simple spinner, like a carousel (brightly themed) could be as magical as a great ride like POC to some. It seems a shame that what Walt valued is somehow being lost today because people can't see past the fact that it's Eisner at the helm. Walt would love DinoRama because of what it will be offering a particular segment of the AK audience.

I agree with gcurling and I am shocked by the height requirement of PW, but it will still appeal to families with children from the age of 6 or so and up.

If you hate DR because of its simplicity then lets hear some negatisim voiced Walts way (or at least Roys) for the Carousel & Dumbo...
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[DVC-Landbaron]

Walt would love DinoRama because of what it will be offering a particular segment of the AK audience.CAPTAIN!!!! Did you say that with a straight face?!?!? Walt would love it!?!?! Have you finally lost it!?!?!

Now we can argue the finer point of theme if you like. And we can discuss the easy way out the Imagineers took with this… this… phony, fraudulent, sham of a theme. But to say Walt would LOVE it!?!? Come on, Cap. Even you know that’s not true!!

[JeffJewell]

If you hate DR because of its simplicity then lets hear some negatisim voiced Walts way (or at least Roys) for the Carousel & Dumbo ...I (and others) have repeatedly pointed out that Dumbo was a late addition to WDW because management at the time believed they weren't giving people enough for their money, but thirty years ago and financially suffering, all they could afford was a spinner.

I imagine that your twisting this fact into Walt's tacit approval of installing the same ride three decades later while spending four and a half billion dollars on Power Rangers and a place to play them, well, I guess it must be some of that "humor" of yours you so often purport to be misinterpreted.

How the painstakingly detailled restoration of a 19th century carousel could find itself lumped in with what was then and now "the cheapest way to put something there to ride" is simply baffling to me.

Jeff

[Captain Crook]

So Jeff, now I purport my humor to be misinterpreted? I thought others did that for me. Oh well...I know you don't like me & never will (unless perhaps you actually meet me someday) and you care even less about understanding my pov and thats ok, so I'll concur that you're right.

Landbaron, you know Walt would love DR...you know it deep within your soul. The simplicity, the irony the sheer audacity...Walt's probably cracked his frozen lips in his cryogenic hideaway after being read of these reports...Oh, Landbaron...you just know it, I can tell!
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[Another Voice]

It’s funny, but I know all about “irony”. In Hollywood, “irony” is a code word for “this script’s a load of steaming crud that really, really stinks but we don’t have the will or the talent to do anything about it and besides if we use a five dollar word that people heard about in their high school English class but that they don’t really understand we can con enough people into spending money on this and scram before they realize what a big pile has been placed in front of them”.

We don’t hate Dino-Rama because it’s simple. We hate it because it’s BAD! Animal Kingdom is supposed to be a place that inspires and brings joy out of the wonders of the natural world. How exactly is that accomplished by bringing in a cheesy roadside carnival?

The theme for the Dinoland was supposed to be a fossil dig site. You had the Dino Institute, the Dig Site itself (the children’s play area), the housing for the grad students working on the dig (the restaurant) and the lab area (the now destroyed real life working lab facility). Chester’s and Hester’s was just the one little shop. In fact the original roller coaster was supposed to run through another dig pit filled with fossils. The theme of the area was changed to a carnival because it required less decoration, and thus was cheaper than staying true to the original concept of the area. There was no intention to create a cheap carnival, but that’s how things worked out.

Dino-Rama has nothing to do about giving the guests what they want. It turned out that way because someone with a spreadsheet figured that carnival games would help the bottom line. I guess that's the difference between "designing a theme park" and "filling up slots at the shopping mall" styles of thinking.

Captain, since you seem to be in contact with Walt (I mean, you know that he loves Dino-Rama), please tell him to come back. The Company really needs his help.

[Captain Crook]

I told him...He likes Mike!
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[OnWithTheShow]

AV perhaps this would be a perfect time to share your ancedote about how make make money off of Walt spinning in his cryo chamber.

[JeffJewell]

So Jeff, now I purport my humor to be misinterpreted? I thought others did that for me. No, it's pretty much just you:sorry for my overeaction & poor attempt at humor. PS This is the famous "tounge in cheek" humor, btw... I, more than almost anybody here, am very easy going, light-hearted & full of humor (oft misunderstood). I can't help it if my humor goes awry now and thenThe Pirate sometimes gets into the act, too:I made that comment totally off the cuff & meant no disrespect to you 3's & 4's...My humor is oft-misunderstood! ..but that's not really important right now.I know you don't like meSigh. I know nothing about you and have no opinion on you one way or the other. I see what you post, and those posts are the only aspects of your being upon which I've offered an opinion.

Is there any chance at all that you'd be interested in commenting on the things written in my posts, or will you be continuing to speculate upon the likes and cares of people about whom you know nothing?

Jeff

[Another Voice]

Mr. Show, when the Captain wrote that Walt loves Dino-Rama I did notice that the lights all over Southern California suddenly got brighter.

[Planogirl]

Walt loves Dino-Rama?

If Walt would have loved something like Dino-Rama, wouldn't he have created something like Dino-Rama? Instead he created whimsical rides with lots of theming that the WHOLE family could enjoy, not just those of certain heights. And he never created a crass, poorly themed area like Dino-Rama. Even Dumbo has more theming in its floppy ears than all of Dino-Rama.

Lesley, I'll be happy to help you with that committee. :)

[Captain Crook]

Nice list Jeff...You got me, boy do I feel sheepish...Man, I'd better find a rock to crawl under...:rolleyes:

No, I think I'll not reply to your opinions with anymore attempt than you try to reply to mine.

Planogirl, Walt put up a simple merry-go-round and had no problem with it, what was innovative about that? A lot of his early rides were repetitive ride systems & hokey (very hokey) storylines - Jungle Cruise...I'm not trying to dismiss Walt, I like what he did, but I think it inconceivable to not see the beauty of the beast in the case of DR. It's a tacky roadside attraction...Done Disney style. The Spinner IS themed as well as Dumbo, PW is brightly colored, about as tacky as can be & actually looks like fun (I suppose that doesn't count?). I don't care that it wasn't the original plan...Hey, plans change. What matters is that they were able to recreate a part of Americana that isn't so prevelent anymore and better yet do it Disney style (no barkers, it's clean, bright and has an air of excitement).

If you gus can simply dismiss things without experieincing it first, fine. If you don't like the theme, that too is your opinion...But I think it's inaccurate to state that there is 'no theming' or that it 'stinks' when there are plenty of folks who will think this is fun...Maybe a lot of fun.

As to what Diseny is doing. Well, this is really where most of you come from. You have no faith that something better will (ever) come due to the fact that you have no appreciation for what has been done recently. I on the other hand love Test Track am looking frward to Space & love Animal Kingdom the way it is. When I see DR, I have to say it makes me smile...It is so silly & hideous that it somehow compelling.

While I actually agree that Walt wouldn't have dreamed something like this and I don't believe in this day and age he'd have greenlighted such a project, but I honestly do believe he'd like the intended result, all things being equal...

Voice, I did receive a nice email from an unamed admirer in Burbank...
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[JeffJewell]

Walt put up a simple merry-go-round and had no problem with it, what was innovative about that? ...are you aware of the history of that carousel and its restoration? Please, God, Captain, Pirate, or someone help me understand how that complete restoration of a piece of Americana from the last century is in any way equivalent to writing Reverchon a check?The Spinner IS themed as well as Dumbo Yes, I agree... Triceratops Spin is just as high quality as the cheap stop-gap a broke Disney installed thirty years ago. I just don't see that as anything to do cartwheels about.

Jeff

PS:Nice list Jeff...You got me, boy do I feel sheepish...Man, I'd better find a rock to crawl under... I apologize if I made you feel bad by proving you were wrong when you implied that I was lying about things you said.

[ShirleyKME]

My daughter is a wdw cm and had a chance the other night to ride PW at a cast preview. She is a pretty good judge of things and gave PW a fairly good report. They had joked before they rode that the name was really Primevial Hurl. So give this new attraction a ride and then see what you think.

[SuzyJewell]

I can't believe I'm being sucked into this. I really have no business being here, especially because I only have time to write a few quick lines, then I'm off to work where I won't be able to defend myself for many hours. (Not to mention the fact that I'm terrified of not using the exact precise words I intend to make myself understood.)

I have loved Disney my entire life. As a child in the 70's my Great-Grandmother lived a few miles outside Orlando, and Magic Kingdom was always included in our annual trips to see her. My Grandmother and I went to EPCOT together right after it opened, on our last trip before Great-Grandmother passed away. That was a bit taboo, because I was missing school, but my mother felt it was more important for me to spend time with GGM and GM. More importantly, however, was that GM was thrilled because not only was I spending quality time with great women who have influenced my life tremendously, I actually learned more in that day at EPCOT than I would have at school. (Yes, I am, unfortunately, a product of the SC public school system, but that really has little to do with my point.)

As the years went by and I earned my own money and could take myself to WDW, I went every chance I could. (Hmmm...car payment, or 3 day hopper..... - Yes, Jeff is gently fixing that problem, wonderful man, you...) My Mother, who had not been to WDW since the 70's was itching to get back. Summer is just too busy with her job, and she and my step-father (who had never been to any Disney park, and assumed it was just like Six Flags with a mouse) saw no reason to take my 11 year old brother out of school for a vacation. My argument was, go, he will learn so much. Yes, MK and MGM are there to have fun. But EPCOT and AK are there to have fun in an educational, informative manner. You can't get that at Six Flags (unless you count the lesson you learn about loosing all your money trying to get a basketball into a too small hoop). I particularly talked up the AK. "There's a great dinosaur exhibit, and you can see cast members cleaning pieces from actual digs, a great see and learn area where you can see animals that they are nursing back to health, or babies, and all throughout the park are cast members eager to tell you about the animals of their countries. "

I finally convinced them to go for a long weekend over a school break this past October. Granted, 4 days is not long enough and can be quite overwhelming, but Jeff and I gave them all our best tips, poured over maps with them, and helped them with an itin. that would let them see most of what they really wanted to, and hoped that this would put a desire in them to return later for a longer trip. (I also, secretly, wanted my mother to know that I had not been wasting my money all these years! Yes, quality costs a little more.) I DID NOT let any of my negative feelings toward the downward spiral of customer service be known. ( I remain, a member of car # 2/3, disapointed, but ever hopeful that someone will replace those money hungry ******** that are... I'm getting too worked up.) I truly wanted them to have the time of their lives. I was so anxious to hear from them. I wanted to see if fresh attitudes, that probably wouldn't realize that what was once expected of WDW could no longer be expected. I NEEDED them to have a great time.

They got back, with great stories, as with all good vacations, but when I asked when they were going back, my Mother replied "We enjoyed ourselves, and I think I see some of what attracts you to WDW, but I really don't see the need to take Evan out of school to go again, especially to spend that kind of money on it. I think Six Flags for the day will give us the same enjoyment." I was crushed. Until I opened my eyes a little wider and saw where she was coming from.

So much for a few quick lines. I guess what I took way too long to say, and if you're still reading, more power to you, is that I'm upset that the easy/cheap way out is being taken in EVERY direction as far as the parks go. I do not have children yet, however, I work with them every day, and have for most of my working career, and although they do not share my bloodlines, it doesn't mean that I love or care for them any less. Give me a reason to take them to a roadside carnival at those prices. Okay, maybe the cast members will have more teeth than the workers at the usual fairs, although I'm sure it has nothing to do with a better dental plan. (Sorry, not interested in being politically correct anymore) Tell me why it's okay to spend 4 Billion (golly that's a lot!) dollars on a tv station full of bad shows, most of which I wouldn't let my family watch, but you can't spend enough to restore CoP, or put a few more cast members back in AK to offer more information on what I'm seeing. Not a zoo my rear - you know what?! IT SHOULDN'T BE!!! IT'S DISNEY!!! Didn't that used to mean something? There should be NOTHING like it. Someone mentioned Imagineers that worked on Dino-Rama. I'm sorry, but I feel that you must have an imagination to be an Imagineer - silly me for thinking that's what the name implies. And I know I'm speaking of which I know very little, and someone will tell me that yes, the imagineers really thought of something better, but the ideas were scrapped in favor of the more cost effective, blah, blah, blah.

Has anyone seen the commercial advertising the 100 year hoopla, in which the little boy decides to do his school project on Walt Disney, the great visionary? As he and his father are enjoying the park together, you see them only on MK rides, and at the end they decide to "see Walt's vision" on Space Mountain - again? Funny, how you don't see them playing carnival games.....

I don't visit these boards often, usually just to see what my husband's been up to, so if I'm beating a dead horse, please forgive me. I don't feel like reading all the other threads to see if I'm saying anything new, in all honesty, they only depress me, and make me confrontational, a feeling I am not comfortable with. But it seems these always come back around to "What would Walt have done?" I thought it was to give the people something they couldn't find anywhere else. Yes, he put in a carousel, but he put in not just any carousel, but one that had an INCREDIBLE history, and put cast members there that loved to tell you all about it so you left the ride feeling more connected to it. I see nothing "visionary" about Dino-Rama. Yes, you can go, as I'm sure I will, and yes, I will even have a lot of fun and make happy memories there because that's what I do, but doesn't anyone understand that it doesn't belong there? How is this one going to stand out in my mind over any other carnival that I've been to? What makes it different? I'm really asking.

I'll quit now because I'm about to cry, and I've spent way too long on this. I know the lists that will follow, and perhaps I'll check back later to see if anyone has anything that will make me change my mind. Perhaps.

Okay - attack!
Suzy

[JeffJewell]

It seems we've reverted to the ole' "I don't like DinoRama" rather than the more germane, IMHO, "Does DinoRama hold enough magic for segments I'm not in." ...it seems to me that quite a few people are answering your question with the response "yes, because some people have fun there." It's not my intention to erase fun in our lifetimes, but "some people have fun there" just seems like a terribly low target for Disney. "Some people have fun there" can be said for Six Flags, for parking lot carnivals (even ones located in real parking lots), for Chuck E. Cheese's, and even for the 25 cent mechanical horsies outside of supermarkets.

The complaints against DinoRama have never been "No one in the world can possibly have fun there," they have been "DinoRama is not representative of the Disney tradition of high quality and Magic."

If DinoRama exhibits Disney Magic based on the fact that "some people have fun there," then Disney Magic is present everywhere in the world, sold by millions of companies that are not Disney.

Is that really what people are trying to say?

Jeff

[JeffJewell]

...that Suzy sure can toss together an epic length post. Can't imagine where she gets _that_ from...

Jeff

[SuzyJewell]

I should have known you were lurking around somewhere, just waiting to say exactly what I meant in many fewer words!

I think that's why I married you!
Suzy

[SuzyJewell]

Thanks, Scoop. It was actually that long sword I was most worried about when deciding whether or not to click "submit"!
Suzy

[Captain Crook]

The sword may be long...But it's made out of rubber!:D
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[Lesley]

Suzy...glad you posted! I pretty much agree with what you've said. Its also cool to see more women around here....though we're all too busy with life to be as active here as the men ;) You and Jeff sure seem to make a great team!

Anyway, my family is pretty much what seems to be the target audience (besides the spreadsheet, that is) for DR....mom, dad, 7yo and 2yo. We've been on the spinner. We refuse to even approach the games...what was it Walt said about "sharp practices?" Wasn't this what he was talking about? And then there's the coaster/wild mouse whatever.... if there's no line for it we might ride it in December. If there's a line we definitely will not be since the whole area is just so darned annoying.....before we even got on the spinner we were going "ugh, lets get away from this place". They took out some really cool stuff in Dinoland to put this in....I really can't believe that...I even tried to convince dh that his beloved lab was not gone...but it was. Dinoland was what it needed to be and they ruined it with this.

As far as Toontown....they created a whole separate area for this. It wasn't thrown smack in the middle of Fantasyland. They didn't take out elements necessary to the show of the previous area to do it. I could take or leave Toontown, but I don't see where its a fair comparison to DR. If anything Toontown is more similar to the Camp Minnie Mickey area at AK...except they have shows instead of playgrounds and a kiddie coaster. DR is...well...not anything I can compare to anything Disney.

[SuzyJewell]

I'm not sure whether to laugh or blush! Welcome to our fair state, although, ugh! Columbia!! Have fun!?
Suzy

[Lesley]

What's wrong with Columbia? We've been planning to move there eventually...or near there anyway...sorry, very OT

[Another Voice]

Part Thirty-Seven wherein the History of ‘Dumbo’ is Explained and where the Captain is shown to be so very very wrong.

When Walt was creating Disneyland he wanted to give his guests the chance to fly with Dumbo. In keeping with his “movies come to life” philosophy he thought that was the experience most people would want to have with the characters from the film. The original plan was to hang a Dumbo ride vehicle from wires and have it soar in a twisting course over all of Fantasyland.

This was 1954 when car had fins, television was black-and-white, and a computer was a person who worked an adding machine all day. There was no way to engineer a ride system that could safely transport the weight of the vehicle and the guests. After much searching, they settled (yes, settled) for a “spinner”. Even then the entire ride was custom built. No one had ever “themed” one of those things before – and Disney wanted to give the special ability for the guests to control the ride itself. A hugely novel concept for the time (and one of the reasons the ride is still popular). Sure ‘Dumbo’ in 1955 was a “spinner”, but that was just a ride mechanism (unlike any other in existence) but not the point of the ride.

Half a century later, that same company can not bring itself to do more than slap plywood cutouts around store-bought carnival amusements. There is no theme to the place (the brightly colored stuff is decoration), no concept beyond spending as little money as possible. And the best, the absolute best, defense that can be given is “that some people may think it’s fun”. The point of Dino-Rama is to spend as little money as possible to put another "attraction" on the guide map.

As Ms. Jewell pointed out in her great post, Disney did not build its reputation by providing momentary amusement for a few. A LOT of people are in that business. For Disney to remain successful they must do much more than what “the other guys” are doing, Disney must remain unique and Disney must remain imaginative. Dino-Rama fulfills none of those requirements.

One does not have to visit the place to understand where it fails. Just as I don’t have to produce the completed movie to judge if a script lacks a good plot. Part of the job of any piece of entertainment is to look appealing and to convince an audience to see it. It’s not a clump of broccoli and Disney isn’t my mother saying “how do you know you don’t like it unless you try it?”.

[d-r]

Originally posted by Captain Crook
If you hate DR because of its simplicity then lets hear some negatisim voiced Walts way (or at least Roys) for the Carousel & Dumbo...


Look. Statements like this are really starting to bug me. I do not know what I've done to deserve this. Not only do you talk about hating me, but you call me simple, and you even refer to me as an "it."

I'm not sure what I've done to deserve this. Sure, I've argued with a couple of people on here from time to time, but I try to be civil and I hate being rude.

Maybe I'm just being to sensitive.

DR

[Captain Crook]

LOL d-r, talk about simple, it actually took me two reads to figure it out!:D

Voice, nice explanation on Dumbo...So we accept the simplistic Dumbo because it was the first themed spinner...OK, fair enough. Then why not accept Pop Century for its "creativity"? Where else are there 50 foot Yoyo's or Bowling Pins? It's unique unto itself - heck you can even say they went out on a limb here. It seems to me that what you attribute to what Walt did with Dumbo is what current Disney has done to a Resort...I understand that you don't like it but does what they've done differ from your criteria?:earseek:
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[Lesley]

Too funny, guys! Oh, d-r you must know that you, the person and rumors board poster, are much loved by all. We have unfortunately stollen your name to shorten the term DinoRama...something so hideous that it hurts to write the whole thing out. Perhaps to spare your feelings we can use DiRa for that horrible carnival that landed in Dinoland making the lab disappear. :D

To answer the Captain....to compare Dumbo to PC is not entirely accurate. Spinners weren't done before Dumbo. Value motels with large decorations were done before PC...the decorations were just different. PC is more akin to the Dino spinner than it is to Dumbo.

And don't accuse me of being an Eisner hater....most of these opinions were formed well before I ever gave a flying fig who Eisner was....and really, its way too simplistic to toss all of this in the lap of one person. Eisner, schmeisner....actually I don't care at all about who runs the company. What I care about is what's happening to the parks.

Oh, pretty accurate description of the "thing that ate Dinoland" scoop!

[Lesley]

Ooops, that's "stolen" not "stollen"...geesh, now I'm turning you into a pastry! For some reason I can't edit the original.

[larworth]

I thought AV had some very interesting revelations about Disney and the perceived value equation (# attractions) at the beginning of this post that seemed worthy of some discussion. However, there is nothing like DiRa to get things rolling so I will open another thread on this.

If we can look past it being cheap. I said forget about it being cheap, just totally ignore the cheap way it was built for a moment (see I was able to do it) I was wondering if having such a contrasting mini-land is a good design technique or not?

The rest of DAK has a proper, formal feel. Is it good behavioral science to provide some sort of brief counter-experience? Kind of like having a vaudeville comedian entertain the audience during the intermission of the Lion King on Broadway. If it hadn’t been done on the cheap (dang, slipped) would it still have been a good concept, not really appropriate for what DAK was trying to do accomplish, or doesn’t really matter it's just a theme park?

I like the whimsical concept. Don’t like the fact there is no berm to separate the clashing themes. I’m also not fond of what they decided to stock it with. Did I mention that it sure seems to be done on the cheap. Could it have been a good idea or not?

[Lesley]

Sorry scoop...not what I meant to say...but even if you replace "done" with "themed" the point is the same.

And I do appreciate a question with substance...
Larworth, you ask whether or not a little "comic relief" in theming is a good idea at AK? Perhaps...but I do see plenty of that in evidence around the park already. There is plenty of playfulness to counter some of the more serious messages the park passes along. Look at the LK show, the dig site, the music and signs as you wait for ITTBAB.

If they had added an area with an appropriate theme, not changing an area of the park that was fine the way it was, maybe something different could work. But still, calling "roadside carnival" a theme is like calling "Six Flags" or "big thrill ride park" a theme. But heck, I'm not a big fan of the Camp Minnie-Mickey concept either.

And I also think that perhaps to keep AK focused on what it is supposed to be they should develop a full park before considering diversions. Right now all they've created is a diversion from the fact that there is a shortage of things to do that actually belong in a park called *Animal* Kingdom....and I don't think the public is that easily fooled.

[Lesley]

Sorry scoop...not what I meant to say...but even if you replace "done" with "themed" the point is the same.

And I do appreciate a question with substance...
Larworth, you ask whether or not a little "comic relief" in theming is a good idea at AK? Perhaps...but I do see plenty of that in evidence around the park already. There is plenty of playfulness to counter some of the more serious messages the park passes along. Look at the LK show, the dig site, the music and signs as you wait for ITTBAB.

If they had added an area with an appropriate theme, not changing an area of the park that was fine the way it was, maybe something different could work. But still, calling "roadside carnival" a theme is like calling "Six Flags" or "big thrill ride park" a theme. But heck, I'm not a big fan of the Camp Minnie-Mickey concept either.

And I also think that perhaps to keep AK focused on what it is supposed to be they should develop a full park before considering diversions. Right now all they've created is a diversion from the fact that there is a shortage of things to do that actually belong in a park called *Animal* Kingdom....and I don't think the public is that easily fooled.

[Lesley]

Sorry scoop...not what I meant to say...but even if you replace "done" with "themed" the point is the same.

And I do appreciate a question with substance...
Larworth, you ask whether or not a little "comic relief" in theming is a good idea at AK? Perhaps...but I do see plenty of that in evidence around the park already. There is plenty of playfulness to counter some of the more serious messages the park passes along. Look at the LK show, the dig site, the music and signs as you wait for ITTBAB.

If they had added an area with an appropriate theme, not changing an area of the park that was fine the way it was, maybe something different could work. But still, calling "roadside carnival" a theme is like calling "Six Flags" or "big thrill ride park" a theme. But heck, I'm not a big fan of the Camp Minnie-Mickey concept either.

And I also think that perhaps to keep AK focused on what it is supposed to be they should develop a full park before considering diversions. Right now all they've created is a diversion from the fact that there is a shortage of things to do that actually belong in a park called *Animal* Kingdom....and I don't think the public is that easily fooled.

[Another Voice]

I know plenty of young children who dream of flying with Dumbo after seeing the movie. The spinner was the best way Disney had at the time of giving them that experience.

I have yet to hear of any child or adult that dreams of spending a few days in the shadow of a fifty foot bowling pin while a neon “Do The Funky Chicken” sign flickers outside their window. Those artifacts were the cheapest why Disney thought it could express its present “brand image” so a premium could be charged for standard issue motel rooms.

That, Captain sir, is the difference.

At its core, ‘Dumbo’ was about making children happy. At its core ‘Dino-Rama’ is all about making a few adults a little richer. I simply prefer to make my children happy rather than lower my standards to insure the continued good fortune of some businessman.

[Barb]

No offense, d-r. :)
I love Dumbo, I like Aladdin. They do have a legimate basis for being there. I don't do the Carousel, it makes me dizzy.:rolleyes:
Try as I may, try as I might, I still don't get the concept. I haven't read a lot of Walt's ideals, but I find it very hard to believe this is what he had in mind. To those who revel in Disney themeing, this is a disappointing quick and dirty fix to a problem. I love AK as a whole. It has charm and appeal. All of the charm and appeal goes right out the window the minute you see that section of the park. I am almost embarrassed to be seen there.
Then again, we are all entitled to our opinions-that's what makes the world go 'round. :)

[raidermatt]

I am trying very hard to stick to my guns, and withhold judgement on DR (not d-r) until I see it in May/June. Same with Aladdin. But its getting very difficult...

Suzy- Very well thought-out and even passionate post. The only part that throws me a bit is the example of your mother and 11 year-old brother. Even if we accept that the recent direction is too Six Flagish, there is still so much more at WDW that is not Six Flagish that its hard to envision infrequent visitors coming away with a complete Six Flags impression. MK has the Mountains, PoC, HM, Fantasyland, parades, fireworks, etc. ToT and Fantasmic are certainly not Six Flagish. The non-DR portions of AK may not be everyone's cup of tea, but they are hardly Six Flagish.

This is not meant as a challenge to your opinions, because while I personally disagree to a certain extent, I realize this is a very subjective topic, and I'm open-minded enough to know my opinions may very well change in the future (though I hope not).

But is it possible that your little brother has hit that "tweener" stage that so many do? The point when Disney is no longer cool? Because when you take a step back and look at the complete package, its very hard to say WDW is merely a cluster of Six Flags parks.


As I hinted in my first sentence, I have reservations about DR. Much more so than Aladdin. As Scoop pointed out, there really is no difference in Aladdin and Dumbo. Both are appropriate for what they are trying to achieve. But I also see the point that Dumbo was more of an achievement in its time than Aladdin is in its. So while my initial opinion is Aladdin is a nice addition, I can understand not giving Disney the same credit for it as Dumbo.

But back to DR. Triceratops' don't fly. I was a Dino-lover as a kid, and I never wanted to fly like a Triceratops. Because they don't fly. Carnival games? I'll wait to see how they fit, but I would feel much better if the prices were similar to what was charged at those roadside carnivals oh so many years ago. The prizes could be toned down to avoid taking a loss. If that were done, and the clear emphasis was on how much fun these games could be, not on finding the spare ones in my pocket, then I would feel much better going in. That would fit with the theme. PW? We'll see. I'm sure it will be fun, but we'll see how it fits.

So if I have reservations, why am I still car 1? Because even if DR is a bomb, the Magic that is still in WDW and even AK will make that bomb sound more like a handful of Pop-Rocks. It'll take more than a few bonehead attractions to fade the Magic I find.


Larworth- For the most part I think the answer to your question is that it would be better to keep the overall feel of the park in order. Fun, exciting attractions can be added without disrupting the overall feel of the park. Things that simulate running like/with a Cheetah, going underwater with a whale, flying like an eagle, and even dueling with a dragon can be themes that would fit in well with Kilamanjaro, Kali, etc. The Boneyard proves the kiddies can be entertained. I'm not sure it has to stay proper and formal, but I think it would be best not to stray TOO far from that theme. After all, it is a THEME park.

[Another Voice]

Oh please Mr. Scoop….

‘Aladdin’ does have a lot in common with ‘Dumbo’ and I’m far less critical of that ride than I am of ‘Dino-Rama’. My qualms are that ‘Aladdin’ was hyped as a “major addition” to the Magic Kingdom (when it’s very clearly not) and that with fifty years of progress in technology and experience behind them that Disney couldn’t come up with something better. It’s all part of the “lack of ambition” trend The Company is exhibiting. I had hoped they would use skill and imagination to design new attractions rather than picking from the menu of cheaper rides in the ‘Rollercoaster Tycoon’ game. But my hopes were dashed once again when the plans for Dino-Rama came out. At least they could have bought one of the upgrades first.

By the way, rumors are saying the cars only spin at the very end of ‘Primeval Whirl’. The cars face forward and are locked in place for most of the ride.

[Captain Crook]

I thought rumors were saying the cars spin the second half of the ride...But so what? Is the ride great or what? So far the advance reports have been overwhlmingly positive.

I NEVER recall Aladdin being billed as a major attraction...

There you go with your "lack of ambition" type charge again. What was the DAKL, chopped liver? I know it's 'just' a resort, but please, what else compares to the breadth, granduer & scheme put forth?
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[mattjs]

I'm skeptical but the few first hand rider reports I've read have been exceptionaly positive. Doesn't address the issue of fitting in with the rest of AK but, like raidermatt, I'm trying real hard to withold judgement on this one.

In any case, Orlando Rocks (www.orlandorocks.com) just posted both pictures and video of PW up and running. For some reason I can't seem to get the video yet but the pictures are most deffinitely up.

[Planogirl]

Captain Crook, I actually agree with you in a way! You said:
When I see DR, I have to say it makes me smile...It is so silly & hideous that it somehow compelling.

I can actually understand what you mean by this statement even if I don't see it myself at DR. I have seen it at other attractions and maybe I'm being overly critical. I guess the only fair thing to do is see how the public reacts to both DR and PC. AND to see if Space will finally be the badly needed BIG attraction at WDW. These little additions just don't cut it which makes all of this worse I think.

Suzy, brilliant post! You say so well what I constantly struggle to say. The problem I have is that I'm by nature succinct which doesn't work real well in these discussions. So post on when you can please! I enjoyed reading your comments. :)

[DVC-Landbaron]

What was the DAKL, chopped liver? I know it's 'just' a resort, but please, what else compares to the breadth, granduer & scheme put forth? Ah, that's easy, Captain! Wilderness Lodge. To which it is almost identical!! Sure wish they would have changed it a little bit. Don't you?

[Lesley]

Landbaron, have you been to AKL? It really is wonderful....and is not nearly identical to WL. Both are beautiful, but I digress.....

And for the "so hideous its compelling" thing....ah, yes...I used to have a couch that fit that description. I don't find Dinorama compelling.....but perhaps others will. Honestly though, I pray everyone hates it so they might consider removing it quickly...they've done that before haven't they? Wasn't there some Goosebumps thing at MGM for awhile?

And sorry about the last triple post...boards were acting up and it won't let me remove the extras.

[Another Voice]

“What was the DAKL, chopped liver? I know it's 'just' a resort, but please, what else compares to the breadth, grandeur & scheme put forth?”

Compared to the breadth, grandeur and schemes that had been planned for the Mediterranean Resort or even the “moderate” Buffalo Junction – Animal Kingdom Lodge does come off as nothing but a well decorate Hilton. There’s nothing unique about the structure or layout. Yes, it’s a very nice hotel from what I’ve seen. But it also didn’t set a very high bar either.

There’s a huge difference between being “innovative” and being “well-done”. A standard box hotel, no matter how much stuff they nail to the walls or how many animals they cage out back, really isn’t innovative. So much COULD have been, but Disney lack the courage to try.

At least Captain you’ve finally acknowledge that Dino-Rama is a complete auto wreck. Something “so hideous that it’s compelling” always draws a crowd on the freeways around here. At least Disney’s figured out a way to make a buck from the gawkers.

[DVC-Landbaron]

... Kinda busy at work lately!!

Suzy or Ms SJ or perhaps Mrs. JJ (just to mitigate the confusion ;)) VERY good post!! I still have the longest post on record, but yours came very close!! It just means I’m not trying hard enough. So, watch out guys!!! Maybe it’s time to dust off that Walt Quote book again!!! :bounce:

Oh, and BTW, I agree with every word of it!! It cuts to the essence of the problem. Landbaron, have you been to AKL? It really is wonderful....and is not nearly identical to WL.Yes I have. And you are right. I like it. Sort of. But, I was referring to lobby portion I suppose. To me it was very reminiscent of WL. Maybe I’m wrong (wouldn’t be the first time) but from the moment I walked in I was just slightly disappointed that the lobby, with minor changes and of course theme details, looked, and felt the same as WL. Doesn’t anyone else see the rather overt similarities? At least Captain you’ve finally acknowledge that Dino-Rama is a complete auto wreck.Awe NUTS!! I was gonna say that!!!

[Lesley]

Ah, yes, some small similarities...it was designed by the same architect wasn't it? I'll admit I felt some "okay, so this is it" at first but as I explored more I found more little things that I love...the firepits, the different levels that I didn't really expect, the cool things that can be found when you venture down the hallways.

Really, I'm curious as to why AV refers to this as a "decorated Hilton" or "standard box hotel". Please tell us, AV! I really want to visit these places that make AKL look so average.

Geesh this really bugs me because I usually completely agree with you guys.....but then again those Garden Wings are magical to me (but that's a totally personal thing and I can understand why they're not to others!). I'd better go to bed....maybe its just that I need sleep!

[Captain Crook]

Voice, excuse me for saying so but now you're comparing 'innovation' & 'well done', there are just too many eggs to fry here. I'm with Lesley, the AKL is extraordinary. It has a zoo for goodness sake. The layout, the landscaping, man it's darn near perfect, IMO...And while you can see distinct similarities with the WL & probably the GC, it is unto itself as an African Savannah Hotel in the heart of central Florida.

I'm happy that my "hideous & compelling" statement was at least able to bridge the gap of our understandings somewhat...But, before the continuation of the "roadside car-wreck" vision continue, I must say that I find that totally uncompelling & wish I could turn back. To me another example of compelling yet will drive you crazy is IASW. Certainly it is a classic & was cool in its time, but that music must have always been irritating.

As for DR (the location), I reiterate, can't we get some consensus that they did do a good job with what they were trying to accomplish, even if you don't like, hate or despise it? Even if you hate the rationale, and realize what they could have done? Can't somebody at least recognize that they did a pretty damn good job recreating a roadside carny show???
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[JeffJewell]

Can't somebody at least recognize that they did a pretty damn good job recreating a roadside carny show??? ...I, for one, have pointed out several times that they put up a reasonably exact duplicate of a parking lot carnival. I honestly don't think that was ever in question (Actually, I believe that at one point I was taken to task for using pretty much the exact words you just used, but between the fact that I'm pretty sure it was before the last big crash and considering the roaring success I met with my most recent foray onto the "search" page, I'm not going to try to find it).

The question that I have more interest in (because it has to do with the future direction of the company and its products, rather than whether or not a particular something can be enjoyed by some subset of people) is whether "recreating a roadside carny" is a project consistent with Disney's traditions. Roadside carnies are recreated every summer weekend all over the country. I just don't see what's so special, what's so Magical, what's so Disney... about DinoRama... about "recreating a roadside carny." I don't feel a few extra concrete molds and plywood cutouts raise the common to the "Magical," even if the Imagineers did do a great job with what they were given to work with.

My problem is what they were given to work with, not the job they did erecting it.

Jeff

PS: I'll let Suzy relate her first words upon entering AKL, if she so chooses... coming from me, it's likely to sound same-old, same-old. What I will say is that the AKL often uses curved lines, whereas WL almost never does... and both are absolutely appropriate for their thematic location. That may be another one of those things that I'm the only one who notices, though. And I just love the multi-level restaurant/bar area hanging off the side of the lobby. If you asked me what's best about AKL, I'd say Boma and Jiko in a heartbeat.

[All Aboard]

Animal Kingdom Lodge does come off as nothing but a well decorate Hilton. There’s nothing unique about the structure or layout. Yes, it’s a very nice hotel from what I’ve seen. But it also didn’t set a very high bar either. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Sometimes I have to reread things several times before I actually believe what I just read.

AV, with all due respect... I value your insight and perspective a great deal. Never does a post of yours go unread by me. I do put alot of stock in what you say. However, when your abhorrance of current management shines through so strong as to make an absurd comment like this, well it's just disappointing. Surely you cannot believe this.

[Barb]

Ok, I'll give you that much-it is cute for what it is. But what it is is not what I expect from Disney when they announce they're adding a new ride/attraction/area to a theme park. Maybe my expectations are too high, maybe they're not as realistic as they should be, maybe I'm asking too much. Triceratops Spin is a concept my four year nephew could have come up with. "Gee, let's make Dumbo look like a dinosaur." When Mr. Toad's Wild Ride was closed to make way for a new attraction, I was all set to hate the replacement. I am a lover of Disney Classics and to take away Mr. Toad was unfathomable to me. But, I love Winnie the Pooh. It has all the things I love about Disney themed rides. It's all just so darned cute, I couldn't help but love it. They could have even gotten away with leaving Triceratops Spin as is, if only (and there's the rub-if only) they would have produced an adequate coaster type ride with some "real" themeing and some real effort put into it. I saw PW. It's exactly like any wild mouse you see at dozens of carnivals. Big deal, it has a lot of signs with dino's on them. Sorry it just doesn't do it for me. I will reserve my final judgement for when I ride this in June. And, maybe I will like it for what it is, maybe I won't. I know I don't like it where it is, no matter what.
As for the "games", all I can say is thank God I don't have little ones anymore. This has to be a parents nightmare at it's best. All I can see is kids having to be dragged away kicking and screaming because they want to play the games. Now I will say that I did see a lot of kids carrying stuffed dino's so they're either farely easy to win or somebody's shelling out a lot of money to win stuffed animals.

[Another Voice]

“Surely you cannot believe this”

Yes Mr. Gcurling, I do both believe and mean this comment. It has nothing to do with my dislike of the current management or the phase of the moon. The key is my sentence that’s “there’s a difference between being innovative and being well done.” To help keep things on track I put my full response in another thread.

Mr. Scoop, you had a good summary of my position. Not everything has to be an “E-Ticket” sized attraction but they should still put a fair amount of care into whatever they do. “Magic” is in the details.

If we are to praise Disney for recreating a cheap roadside carnival, should we praise Disney for the tremendous job they did on recreating that McDonalds down by the Animal Kingdom? Let’s see a post that goes like this:

OF COURSE IT’S MAGICAL; IT LOOKS JUST LIKE A REAL McDONALDS! They serve fries and everything!! Can’t you just feel the magic!! What a job they did! The menus are exactly like the real menus in a McDonalds. The attention to detail makes me want to cry. And the parking lot – only Disney would have the magic to put a parking lot RIGHT NEXT to their recreation of a McDonalds! And isn’t it the best parking lot you’ve ever seen?!!?

[OnWithTheShow]

AND YET MILLIONIONS OF PEOPLE EAT THERE EVERYDAY AND LOVE IT! I ask what is wrong with giving the people what they want? I know I enjoy McDonalds fries and don't mind the two standard McDonalds on property and I think that concession stands with McDonald's fries are great. How are they any less magical than a popcorn stand?