Animal Kingdom Lodge – Innovative or Well Done

[Another Voice]

To maintain a level sanity in the wandering threads, I’m going to split this one off from the “Disappointing News - Primeval Whirl” thread. I’ll start by clipping out the salient comments:

Captain Crook:
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?

Another Voice:
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.

DVC-Landbaron:
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,

Another Voice:
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.

DVC-Landbaron:
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?

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.

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.

Gcurling:
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 abhorrence 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.

[Another Voice]

“Innovative” means to be different, unique, to create a new experience. “Well Done” means to take an existing format and produce it better than others have. Animal Kingdom Lodge falls into the well done category. That doesn’t mean it’s bad, but it does mean that it’s a very good example of what other people have created.

The entire “themed hotel” concept was probably pioneered by Disney with the Polynesian way back in 1971. Since them many, many people have gotten into to business. In fact Las Vegas has probably pushed the concept to the limit. The Strip is nothing but a set of basically identical buildings decorated with different knick-knacks: a mini-Eiffel Tower and you get the ‘Paris’, a few parrots get you ‘Mandalay Bay’, you know the drill. Some of the hotels are really well done (like the Venetian), but none give the guest anything more than a “hotel” experience.

The Animal Kingdom Lodge is a very standard hotel building decorated very nicely. The lobby art is nice, the firepits are nice, the wall lights are nice – but it’s still very much a hotel. The animals out back are an added attraction, but it’s the same concept that any resort with a view offers: a view of the ocean at Hilton Head or Hawaii, the forests in Yosemite or even the New York skyline. Even the resorts in Vegas have their animal pens. But the experience is all pretty much the same: long corridors leading to my room with the nice color television and overpriced room service that’s all very pleasant to look at.

To be truly innovative, Disney needed to offer a different experience instead of just different decoration. If the goal was to “stay with the animals” then why not give me that experience instead of giving me animals to look at as long as I stayed in an upgraded room? Why not create a concept like the Treehouse Villas? Scatter small clusters of rooms among the savannah and REALLY make me feel I’m surrounded by wildlife. Instead of one more soaring vault lobby (which don’t exist in Africa), why not a village that housed guest services? How about a REAL outdoor African marketplace and restaurant instead of a hotel dinning room that’s been decorated to look like one? How about a bunch of huts to stay in? Or how about real tents that you could “take on safari” (think about how popular those zoo sleepovers are with kids – now image that done Disney style)?

Disney set out to make a good hotel and the succeeded. However, had they set out to “create an innovative experience for our guests”, they could have created something so much better. I’m not here to bash Animal Kingdom Lodge, just to remind people that even more can be (and should be) accomplished.

[JeffJewell]

I’m not here to bash Animal Kingdom Lodge, just to remind people that even more can be (and should be) accomplished....I agree with AV on this one. In fact, I probably could have used his closing sentence at the end of about 90% of my posts... simply replacing "Animal Kingdom Lodge" with "Animal Kingdom," "DinoRama," "Journey Into Your Imagination," or whatever it was that people assumed I was just "bashing," at the time.

Jeff

[DisOrBust]

You have a point and your ideas are interesting but are they obtainable?? Somethings can not be done due to Mothernature, building codes and cost. I have stayed at AKL and truely thought it was a great "experience" . It may not be Africa, it is also not $10,00 to stay there. My DDs,4 and 7yo, who are really the reason we go to wdw ( yeah right!) LOVED it! There favorite was the smalll, intimate story telling time at the fire pit. That is innovative, and not done at your average Hilton.

Are there things that could have been done better? Sure like those god aweful "standard" view rooms on the way to the bus stop. But on a whole I thought it was "inovative".

IMHO
Sue

[Captain Crook]

The animals outback are an added attraction.
Could you possibly understate this to any greater degree?:rolleyes:

AKL is exquisite in detail, overwhelming to the senses and nothing but quality. The African Art, the African CM's, the landscaping that so resembles a true African Savannah that native African's are impressed. I don't know what else they could have done to make this place more spectacular & impressive.

I've never swam in a hotel pool before and watched giraffe's walk by...that's pretty inovative.:D
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[hopemax]

I have mixed feelings when it comes to the AKL. I think it's great that Disney built another mini-deluxe hotel. I think the animal area is great, I think the lobby is great. But I still have issues with some elements of the lodge.

The design of the hotel wings for instance. They remind me more of the value-hotel buildings areas then a moderate or deluxe hotel. Why have the top decoration alternate? Why not do it all the way across the top? I think the wings feel boxy, too many square edges and flat tops, and it certainly doesn't help that the artist renderings have the thatched roofs continuing throughout the structures, hiding all those harsh edges. I also am not to fond of the balconies. They seem "manufactured" but the other areas all seem to say that "this was constructed from whatever wood we could find."

[OnWithTheShow]

While I have not been over to the Animal Kingdom Lodge yet I can see where AV is coming from. Although I loved the Grand Californian and thought it was a wonderful resort it does strongly resemble the style of the Wilderness Lodge (same architect I think for all three AKL, WL, GC). The resort while top notch is "well done" but not "innovative". However I think that well done is still far above what most resorts are doing these days. As an exception to that anyone who wants to see what innovative is should make...nevermind EVERYONE should make a trip to the new Gaylord Palms Resort and Convention Center.

[Safari Steve]

I wouldn't compare DAKL to JIYI.... that's completely baffling.

[Testtrack321]

I was one of the lukiest people on earth when I got to stay at the AKL. It was magnificant. Will never see anything like it ever again. But was it innovative. Well...
Yes
-Introduced animals into a hotel atmosphere, more than just a bird in the loby.
-Created an African atmosphere using arcatecture and landscape
-Innovative eating and shopping facilites

NO
-Standard layout
-More animals
-Still defies all logic why you see the giraffs on the last day

If it implamented a suspended monorail to travel to "mini-hotel" (like the Polonesian) and each had a food area and other things, that would be innovative. AKL, unfortunatly isn't innovative. But it is EXTREMELY well done.

[Another Voice]

Once again – being a good hotel does not necessarily make it innovative. I’ve stayed in plenty of hotels like the Ritz Carlton that are “…exquisite in detail, overwhelming to the senses and nothing but quality”. But none of them are “innovative” – they were just really nice hotels. And I’ve stayed at hotels in Vegas that have tons more decoration and better attention to “themed” detail. But those aren’t innovative either (and most aren’t even good). The Animal Kingdom Lodge is a hotel, one with a gimmick for sure, but it’s still just a hotel. And as they say, there’s nothing wrong with that.

But given the resources Disney has to work with and the “mission” of the Animal Kingdom, I’m sure that they could have come with something a little more interesting for a giraffe than to be just the backdrop for the pool.

Oh and Mr. Scoop – take a look at the pictures of the Mira Costa Hotel at DisneySea and then tell me that doesn’t give you a “better sense of place”. That was based on the plans for the Mediterranean Resort.

[Barb]

Another vote for extremely well done. While our room was layed out just like our room at WL, our view was anything but! I was in total awe of our savannah view room. I have never spent so much time just sitting on our balcony watching our view. It was breathtaking. The restaurants were incredible, the lobby and the savannah viewing areas were wonderful, the pool was wonderful. I am always looking for those Disney touches and I found my fair share at every corner. While it may not be innovative, it satified my needs to my full expectations.

[Lesley]

Oh, make me feel like a slacker with low standards! :D But now I know what that nagging feeling in my gut was...

I do really like the AKL...so much that I want to stay there again (despite the rotten bus service, I might add). Well done is definitely the term for it though. And I'll even give it partial credit for being innovative....this particular idea has never been done before, has it? And it is...once again....well done.

Creepy how I've begun to not expect more than this from Disney. But I don't know that I agree about the possibility of doing better at this point in time. I think this is the best we're gonna get out of the company as it stands today. Sad, isn't it? Not that AKL is disappointing...but the fact that I don't even expect better.

I do get your point now AV...Disney used to be the ones who could come up with an awesome concept then do whatever it took to make that concept reality. Now they come up with a standard concept (themed hotel, in this case) and fill in lots of details that they hope add up to something great that fits the budget. What used to hold at its core innovation and artistic vision with secondary thought to profitability, now holds at its core profit motives and cost effectiveness with secondary thought to creativity. And it makes a world of difference.

[DVC-Landbaron]

… But that doesn’t make Disney®, (Walt’s) Disney

Oh, make me feel like a slacker with low standards!

And

Sad, isn't it? Not that AKL is disappointing...but the fact that I don't even expect better Yes!! Very sad!! But don’t be too hard on yourself. We’ve all been there (some are still there, eh, Captain? ;) ) It’s that chipping away of the standards I’ve been on about. Very slowly, very methodically, chipping away. Until, before you know it… BAM! It hits you in the head and you ask yourself, “Where’s my DISNEY?!?!?! And you realize that it isn’t here anymore. So, you post a couple posts on the News & Rumors Board. Laugh at how hardheaded the Pirate can be. Pack up the kids and try to ignore everything you don’t like about the place and really concentrate as hard as you can on the magic that’s still there. And finally, you cut out little news clips, stick them in your pocket and wait until an appropriate thread turns up where you can use it, cause you don’t think it’ll go over as a thread of its own.

(he sits back to proof read the previous paragraph. Not quite what he had in mind… but it’ll do. It never quite finishes the way he had in mind when he started. He reaches in his pocket and pulls out the very worn piece of paper, which was ripped from the Chicago Sun-Times over a week ago. He starts to type: )

In 1968 Leo Burnett retired. On his way out, he gave a little speech to his employees about the company that bore his name.Somewhere along the line, after I’m finally off the premises, you – or your successors – may want to take my name off the premises too. You may to call yourself… Ajax Advertising or something. That will certainly be OK with me – if it’s good for you.

But let me tell you when I might demand that you take my name off the door. That will be the day when you spend more hours trying to make money and less time making advertising – our kind of advertising. When you stoop to convenient expediency and rationalize yourselves into acts of opportunism – for the sake of a fast buck. When your main interest becomes a matter of size just to be big – rather than good, hard, wonderful work.

That, boys and girls, is when I shall insist you take my mane off the door – even if I have to materialize long enough some night to rub it out myself – on every one of your floors.Hmmm. Maybe a name change is in order. What’d you think? How does it sound? Walt AJAX World.

[Captain Crook]

...But you guys must be blind.:o

Let's go back to scoop's post and move forward.
1. Gaylord Palms...great views from this place, surrounded by highways...Very nice.
2. Voice, the innovation is the zoo surrounding the hotel. Who else has done this? As to the wings being pedestrian, I realize the 'feel' is lacking because of the long walks, but what else could they do? They were surrounding these ordinary wings with animals from Africa (which was/is the whole point). If building a nice replica of an African Lodge in Central Florida isn't innovative, or importing African CM's, artwork & arifacts isn't innovative, or landscaping the area so properly that African CM's can't tell the difference between Disney & home isn't innovative, so be it. But building a zoo around a hotel has got to be innovative.

I'm sure they could have come up with something a little more interesting for a girafe than being the backdrop for the pool.
Is that all they are? Really? Where else will you see this? What "more interesting" would you have them do? Perhaps jump through fire rings? Maybe have them get chased down & eaten daily by lions? Creating the natural (yet peaceful & harmonious) environment was a chore unto itself & quite an innovative touch for Resort.

I do get your point now AV, Disney used to be the ones who could up with an awesome concept...
3. The concept for AK isn't awesome? I guess I can't make you see these things if you don't see them, but the concept for AK is far superior to the 'pretend world' of Mira Costa that Vegas has already perfected...
4. Landbaron, I understand your view of me and that's ok. But you of all people here, do know I'm not blind. You know I see and you know what I see, you just can't figure out how I get from point 'A' to 'E' without going through 'b, c & d' first...:D But seriously, if you guys don't think the AKL is Disney doing a bit of what Disney has always done (at its best), then there is no conversation to be had and I must again bring up the 'ulterior motive' possibility. If Walt had done AK, there would be nothing, NOTHING that could compare with the accolades that would be being heaped upon this place...

Lastly, Lesley, you had to have hit AKL during a very bad time for the bus transportation to be bad. We've been 4 times and the service is 'superior'. The dedicated busses are always waiting for you, with no crowds. While I don't dispute you had a problem, this isn't the norm & the AKL bus service continues to get high marks from returning guests...
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[airlarry!]

Whistle! Scoop, you must play fair.

Comments about the innovativeness of the Golf Resort or the Dumbo Spinner or Dark Rides have to be...
taken...
into...
Temporal Context .

Just because the Dumbo Spinner may have been magical and innovative for ITS time, does not mean that the Alladin Spinner is magical and innovative for THIS time at the SAME park.

Just because the Golf Resort at the time may have been a nice story for average Jeaux Bleaux who has never seen a privileged country club, does not mean that Disney should rest on its laurels today and do 'nice stories' of the National Parks or the African Savannah or whatever else Mr. Architect can do with Vaulted Ceilings.

PoopCentury is a redherring, Mon Ami Scoop. It flunks all tests. It is neither beautiful, nor innovative, nor does it take you away. One doesn't 'give' anything if one compares the comments about AKL to the trashing of the PoopCentral Resort.

In fact, for once, this thread doesn't seem necessarily like Eisner bashing. It is just a lament that the Disney people painted yet another beautiful Impressionist painting, but that there are a plethora of those on the property right now. Where is the next level? Isn't that what Disney used to be about? Raising the bar?

That said, AKL is close. I have always been a big fan of Sir Baron's idea that the resorts should be 'worldly' (in my view either in location or time) and should be places that take the average fan away from the humdrum of just another beautiful hotel. AKL seems to do that. But oh, what might have been. I think it is unfair to criticise Mr. Voice's disappointment in What Could Have Been. If critiquing of this nature is done without bitterness, it is good for the Company. Anybody care to guess whether or not the Imagineers (instead of the Hotelleers) would have taken those treehouse villas from the golf course area and integrated them with the Savannah? They ran a monorail through a Polynesian village and a Cement Skyscraper, for Walts sake!

For example. My family and I love the Winnie-the-Pooh attraction at WDW. We are not bitter or upset or screaming at Ei$ner for approving it. But is there a little part of me that wishes we would have gotten the TDS version instead? Of course. Does that make me a negative person?

[All Aboard]

There is absolutely nothing innovative about the Disney Inn. Nothing, no matter how hard you try to squeeze some "innovation" out of it, none drips out. It is a plain, vanilla resort overlooking a golf course. Big deal, hardly the first of its kind. There's hundreds of golf resorts in this country that have been around alot longer than 30 years. The only place it takes you is right where it is, a Central Florida golf course. AKL is vastly more innovative than that.

Look, I beat my brains out trying to defend the existence and execution of the All Star concept at WDW. At least in that discussion, I could understand the sentiment of the "other side." Here, I'm just plain baffled.

"Could have done more." Give me a situation anywhere, anytime where that isn't true Everything that was ever built, everything ever conceived could have been more. One side criticizes the other for accepting something because it fulfills their desires - pointing out that they must set too low of a hurdle. To me, that's a far more reasonable measure of success than having something pass the "could have more been done" test.

If anyone can honestly say that either Golf Resort or the wing portions of the Contemporary fit the "Disney Standard" better than AKL, I can infer nothing more than judgement being clouded by contempt for the current "Disney." Sorry, but I just see it no other way.

[JeffJewell]

what Disney resorts have met this standard we are holding AKL to and specifically why or how? ...it sure looks like you're trying to create a "Disney standard" argument where none exists.

AV trying to explain the difference between "innovative" and "well-done" is a far cry from attempting to claim AKL fails to meet a necessary "standard" (I'm quite sure I'm the only regular who's ever questioned AKL meeting a "Disney standard," and it's on the bus issue. I really thought we'd hashed this out and moved on, already).

Words mean things. If people are going to communicate with words, everyone must use words to mean what they really mean.

AKL is a nice hotel, and I can accept folks' opinion that it's a _very_ nice hotel, or even the best hotel they've ever seen. But that doesn't change the fact that it's not particularly innovative.

The best counter-point I've yet seen is the Captain's, that putting a zoo around a hotel hasn't been done, and is therefore "innovative" (I haven't addressed that point, pro or con, because I simply don't know whether or not it's true, and I don't care to do the research to find out one way or the other). I have less regard for his other points, about the landscaping and imported art and CM's, because that's what all the locationally themed resorts do. Throwing a dart at a spinning globe to pick the next source country doesn't qualify as "innovative."

Whether or not "putting a zoo around a hotel" is, in and of itself, innovative enough to make the place meet some "standard" is a different conversation entirely.

Jeff

PS: 'Scoop, to prove I'm not trying to ignore your question, I really think only the Poly and the Contemporary show significant innovation. And I can understand how that might be difficult to see today, because of the temporal aspects of the term "innovation."

PPS: Can we let the Golf Resort rest in peace, hmmm? Even it's loudest proponents must accept that it failed... why would you want to use the most obvious mistakes of the past as a measure of "Disney standards" today?

[All Aboard]

Jeff, I don't think you are the only one to question AKL=Disney Standard. Voice said it comes off as nothing more than a well decorated Hilton. I'd say that's questioning it.
--
Forgive the tone of my previous post, but this thread has gotten me a bit riled up. Often, the occupants of vehicle three use phrases like "rose colored glasses" when referencing folks up at the front of the motorcade. That no matter what Disney does, they'll defend it. That's your impression, that's understood.

But, please don't get upset when others percieve motivations of car 3 being driven by a disdain for current management. Often I read posts and it seems as thought some folks believe that everything at WDW in the early 1970's was absolutely, positively perfect in every imaginable way. Everything. And then (and insert your own date here) everything went absolutely, positively to crap.

I just get that impression from this thread. A resort that gets rave reviews from almost everyone takes a beating here.

[JeffJewell]

Voice said it comes off as nothing more than a well decorated Hilton. I'd say that's questioning it. ...but I never saw where he stated "well decorated Hilton = not 'Disney standard.'" I've interpreted AV's posts in this thread to mean that he is disappointed that a company with Disney's resources and history hasn't pushed the envelope to a significant degree in recent years, and he's pretty adamant about words ("innovative," in this case) meaning what they mean, but little beyond that.

Jeff

[JeffJewell]

A resort that gets rave reviews from almost everyone takes a beating here....I just don't see where saying that something isn't particularly innovative equals "takes a beating."

If we're going to get into tendencies of Car riders, there's a tendency for some forward Car passengers to expect everyone to have nothing but exemplary things to say about a product simply because it says "Disney" on the side of it, and to accuse "Bashing!" when anything non-gushing is posted. In the thread so far, AKL has suffered the following slings and arrows from declared Car 3 riders and AV (who I don't recall ever declaring an allegiance): "Animal Kingdom Lodge falls into the well done category," that it is "decorated very nicely," and "AKL is a nice hotel, and I can accept folks' opinion that it's a _very_ nice hotel, or even the best hotel they've ever seen." Car 3 is _not_ "beating" the AKL by bringing its "innovation" factor into question.

What about the Car 1 poster who followed up AV's line "I’m not here to bash Animal Kingdom Lodge, just to remind people that even more can be (and should be) accomplished" with "if the Animal Kingdom Lodge cannot meet the Disney standard, then I dare say not much can anymore in the terms of lodging." If there's anyone looking for arguments here, consider the folks who are misrepresenting what was said, using emotionally charged terms from old threads, rather than concentrating on what was actually in the post.

Jeff

[mattjs]

Love reading you guys and one of these days I'll muster the courage to dive right in myself.

But I gotta say this AKL innovation discussion, while exceptionaly entertaining, is going nowhere. It seems to me if you're position is that the african savannah, zoo around the resort, staffed primarily by native africans, in central Florida concept doesn't qualify as innovative...well...that's end of discussion right there. There's nothing wrong with holding that oppinion. You're entitled to it and you defend it passionately.

But in doing so, I think you've set a standard that either exceeds by so much or is sufficiently different from the one set by those who disagree with you on the boards that even discussing the matter becomes pointless. On this very specific point, there's not enough common ground to even bother.

[Another Voice]

This three hour head start you people get is unfair.

I suppose I could answer each an every point that’s come up. I’m very glad that many seem to understand what I’m saying.

But one comment really struck me more than anything else I read:

“But seriously, if you guys don't think the AKL is Disney doing a bit of what Disney has always done (at its best), then there is no conversation to be had and I must again bring up the 'ulterior motive' possibility”

Never has the problem with today’s Disney been so well put. The Company and others simply DEMAND you accept and love what they do – or you’re an evil person.

Or from Burbank’s point of view, the problems with Disney’s products don’t lay with Disney, they lay with you the consumer.

Brand loyalty is a fact of life for many. Entire corporations are founded around the concept of people doing dumb things simply to be part of the in-crowd. And it works well for a time. You’ll see a lot of marketing about “quality” and a lot of internal bragging about being “best in the business”. And all the while the company tries a little less, worries about things other than its customers. Soon the public forgets what made the brand special to begin with. Eventually the world moves on and the public leaves. And the Company that screams and yells and threatens that you accept its product’s “quality” is left all alone. Ask K-Mart, ask Pan Am Airlines, ask Chrysler.

I want Disney to EARN its reputation, not make a living by selling it. My loyalty and my money are not the birthright of any corporation, no matter how fervent some “fans” may feel about it. I look for something more than a brand label and I do not feel I need to blindly “love” whatever is tossed my way to be a good person.

Others may feel differently. And that’s fine. Please, go spend your money while you can.

[JeffJewell]

I think you've set a standard that either exceeds by so much or is sufficiently different from the one set by those who disagree with you on the boards that even discussing the matter becomes pointless ...the very heart of most of my posts on this thread has been to point out that there was no attempt to set any "standard" by pointing out AKL's not that innovative. Declaring retroactively that this was supposed to be a "standard" was manufactured by "those who disagree."

I mean, this conversation was pulled to its own thread just to separate it from the now wearisome "standard" Merry-Go-Round.

I don't think some people will be happy until every dissenting voice has been browbeaten into silence.

Jeff

[mattjs]

By stating that AKL isn't innovative you are setting a standard for the idea of innovative as you see it. A standard you feel AKL does not meet.

And I agree with scoop that it would help to have some existing examples to get a feel for where you see the innovative line being drawn.

[JeffJewell]

Let's all take a breath here (myself certainly included!) and try to figure out if AKL is not innovative, has any other Disney resorts been innovative. I guess my point is that AV appeared to move this subsection of thread away from the wider "Disney standards" discussion, and I felt he did it for a reason: to explain how he could call a clearly well-done hotel "not innovative." I don't think calling something non-innovative is the same as bashing it or suggesting it's inferior to anything in particular... New Coke was perhaps an innovative recipe compared to Old Coke, but was judged clearly inferior. "Innovative," in and of itself, does not imply any value judgement.

Perhaps I'm too suspicious, but I don't see where discussing the relative innovation level of Disney resorts is going to go anywhere positive. As I mentioned earlier, to my way of thinking, only the Poly and Contemporary showed significant innovention at the time of their construction. I'm not saying that everything else should be torn down, and I'm not saying that guy in charge at the time was the only innovator Disney ever had. And I don't see where the comparison takes us except back to a place where one group of posters can say "See, the new guy innovates just as often as the old guy... therefore Disney standards haven't slipped," when innovation is at best a small part of what "Disney standards" are made of.

Jeff

PS: The browbeating comment may have been inappropriate; the point was that I think a person should be able to say "AKL is not an innovative hotel" without being expected to delinate all innovation ever occuring in any Disney hotel, or being dismissed as a basher.

[larworth]

I guess my short answer is I wouldn't term AKL as tremendously innovative, but I also have no complaints about its addition.


How critical is resort innovation, anyway? Should we expect Disney to be innovation leaders in the lodging and restaurant industry? Or should we only expect them to be innovative in the application of best industry practices to their business niche?

I assume themed lodges/resorts pre-existed the Poly/Contemp. Some place you could go and pretend you were of a different time and place. I can accept that the application of this concept to extend the immersive experience beyond the park gates was very novel (innovative) at that time.

AKL seems to be just another good application of this same concept. A fine/good/great? addition to the family. Does it stretch the concept in new novel ways to be termed innovative? I’d say no. Now, maybe the ToT Hotel would have been considered an innovation.

I’m really not sure what level of innovation standard to apply here, given that they will soon be a 100% resort based business model. Anyway, we have much more glaring symptoms to base our diagnosis on.

[Testtrack321]

Innovative- Anything that has made people re-think the idea of hotels.
Well Done- A hotel that uses standard construction methods, but these and the sceanery are very well done.

The Contemporary was innovative becasue; it used a box-like constructing method, and it had the monorail running through it.

[Captain Crook]

The AKL is innovative because they built a wildlife park around it...
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[raidermatt]

I've stayed out of this one because I haven't seen AKL in person. I can only say it certainly looks to be very well done.

Innovative? Just like anything else, there are different degrees to innovation. Views of the simulated African plane may not be exactly cutting edge, but I'd certainly give this a certain level of uniqueness, and therefore at least a small amount of innovation.

How about an African-themed resort hotel? Certainly that's one Vegas hasn't attempted. Why? Because its not a guaranteed hit. There are easier, glitzier solutions. So again, while an African-themed resort is not exactly the equivalent of innovations like the George Foreman Grill, or automobile cup holders, there was a certain amount of risk involved that didn't need to be taken.

As for does it really matter whether AKL is innovative, I'm pretty much in agreement with Larworth: No. Or at least it does not matter nearly as much as being well-done.

[Testtrack321]

Raidermatt, how can you compare AKL to the George Forman Grill. That's a first. AKL is very well done it's my favorite hotel at Disney. I love it. But the problem is the same as always, it isn't revolutionary. It dosn't do anything brand new and exciting that expands the imagination. If it opened in '92, yes, then it would be innoventive, because AK wouldn't have been built.

[Another Voice]

The deal with “innovation” is that it is a constantly changing target. The world is constantly trying to catch up and any thing that really is innovative usually sets the new standard that everyone tries to meet.

Way back in 1971 the Polynesian Resort was very innovative. It was the first truly “mega themed” resorts and even Ceasers Palace in Vegas didn’t carry its theme as thoroughly as the new Disney Resort. This was back in the day when hotels wanted to look like hotels, “themes” were nothing but the names of the restaurants and the logos on the cocktail napkins. Amusement park atmosphere ended at the turnstiles. The whole concept of walking into another world and loosing yourself was very new, and the idea of using movie-making techniques in a resort setting was completely unheard of.

Now fast forward a third of a century to today. Almost every major resort is now a “themed” complex. Take a look at the Vegas strip or watch the Travel Channel. Gee, even low-end restaurants are mega-themed (Rainforest Café). The demand to have a themed experience is so pervasive that the developers of The Block shopping mall just south of Disneyland publicize that their “theme” is an urban shopping mall (and they’re spent serious money decorating their mall to look like it). And the latest mega mall up in L.A. is bragging about how they used Disney imagineers and set designers to create their new place.

Putting up a standard hotel building, putting up a bunch of authentic art and serving a few Americanized authentic dishes in the main restaurant just isn’t unique anymore. Is the Paris resort in Vegas “innovative” today because it has a replica Eiffel Tower? Atlantis has its shark pools, Mirage has its tigers and dolphins, and a friend owns a lodge in Montana that keeps buffalo and elk near the cabins to give the guests the feeling of “being in Big Sky Country”. Are all of those places now “innovative”? Just being bigger doesn’t necessarily make one unique.

So if themed hotels are no longer innovative, what is? How about making the hotel go away? If the goal of the place is to see the animals – then put the animals at the center of attention. Make it feel that the animals surround the guests rather than the hotel surrounds the animals. How about small clusters of rooms/villas surrounded by the grasslands? Or how about a safari tent in the middle of a clearing (if people can provide four-star service in these tents in Uganda then Disney can figure out a way to do it in Orlando). Let me feed the animals, let me walk among them, let me do things that I can’t do at a zoo or at a themed restaurant. I can go to any animal park in the country and take their open truck tour to feed and touch the giraffes; floating in a hotel pool and watching one from a distance is a lesser experience than that.

Real innovation is not taking an existing concept and doing it bigger or better than anyone else. That’s an issue of quality (which I am not disputing at Animal Kingdom Lodge). Real innovation is a matter of surprising people. I’ll be very happy to be surprised by Disney again.

[Lesley]

Oh geez, here we go again!

As far as innovation the Poly and Contemporary, considered in the time they were created, were innovative. Partial credit for innovation goes to many other resorts, including AKL. Stormalong Bay could be considered innovative...though the rest of the hotel is pretty standard. There is nothing at all innovative about the GF, though as a hotel it is beautiful. But as usual I think we all have our own definitions.

Not everything has to be innovative...everything should be extremely well done, as AKL is. But I think what really gets to many of us is that "extremely well done" is being passed off as innovation, and many other things being done at WDW now aren't really all that well done. To me the whole thing is what I said before...the motivation. The focus is no longer upon creating great experiences because there is great satisfaction in creating and experiencing them......it is on creating things for the sake of making money. The heart of the company is no longer in it. I think it may have lasted quite a while after Walt's death because of the many others in the company who were also dedicated to making dreams come to life. The focus is now on the spreadsheets, the formulas and which concept is the one that can make us the most $.

From what I can tell of the business world (of which I know nothing really....my background is in education, art, family and home) the focus of Disney will probably never be what it was...it is long lost already. We may see that level of creativity and vision again someday....I really do hope so....but not from this company. Actually not from any company. I think it needs to start again with an individual...who can gather others...start something new. And once the initial visionary is gone, once that individual's dreams become just a company, that will slowly disappear as well.

Walt Disney is dead.

Walt was the magic, the spark, the vision of Disney. Its amazing that so much of his magic has lasted so long after his death. That truly is remarkable. I'll continue to visit and enjoy WDW... hey, I've got points to use every year until 2042! But maybe its time to stop wishing for what will not ever return. I'll enjoy what I can of it all as long as possible. But I'm more and more certain that the great days of WDW are over. Let me try to be very zen about this and accept it. I think I need a new car..... the magic is all but gone, but I'll continue to visit as long as I can still enjoy myself and sniff out little specks of pixie dust.

Now wait...I seem to have gone off on a tangent....innovative vs. well done? Actually I think it may be pointless to even go there. For me anyway.

[hopemax]

Okay,

Innovation: Using the parks and hotels to play off of each other to add to the show: Tomorrowland as the backdrop to the Contemporary, Adventureland as the backdrop to the Poly. If the Contemporary had been built where the Poly is and vice versa the innovation would have been lost. And for this reason, I'm not sure how innovative the animal areas at AKL are. AKL plays off the existing theme park, the theme park relies heavily on animals and African architecture, so of course there would be animals and African architecture at the hotel. It required more resources to pull off than the Poly/Adventureland but I don't know if that makes it "innovative?"

[WDWHound]

Originally posted by Lesley

From what I can tell of the business world (of which I know nothing really....my background is in education, art, family and home) the focus of Disney will probably never be what it was...it is long lost already. We may see that level of creativity and vision again someday....I really do hope so....but not from this company. Actually not from any company. I think it needs to start again with an individual...who can gather others...start something new. And once the initial visionary is gone, once that individual's dreams become just a company, that will slowly disappear as well.


I understand what you are saying, but this doesn't have to be true. Walt was a genious (as was Roy in his own way), but his techniques were not mysterious. Disney could recreate the Magic again. Put simply, Walt always produced the best product he could. It was expensive, but the quality and innovation attracted the visitors in large enough numbers to pay for it. Want proof, look at Tokyo Disney Seas. This park shows clearly that Walt's old techniques still work and can be implemented today. Now if Disney was only willing to risk their own money on the concept.

Even now, the company could turn around if several strong leaders were placed at the helm who insisted that the focus of the company return to quality and long term investment. This will be difficult at best. It would mean they have to have the courage to stand up to wall street. It would also mean risk because it would cost the money in the short term, making them even more at risk for a hostile takeover. The risk of failure would be very real, but no higher than the risk Walt originally took with Disneyland. There is still a chance that the company will come to their senses and take that risk. As long as that chance is there, I will have hope that the parks can rerun to what they once were.

AV: I find myself of mixed opinion on what you have written on this thread. I agree that Disney rarely innovates anymore, and I miss it too. Still, AKL represents a high standard of quality that we so rarely see from Disney these days and that encourages me. Recently we have been getting low quality and no innovation in almost everything Disney does in the states. At least they have upped half of that magic equation with this hotel. I too would like to see a return to the days when everything they did was high quality and most were innovative as well, but I am overjoyed just to see a high quality project again.

[JeffJewell]

...the Poly also used the modular construction... oddly enough, I didn't remember/realize the C did. Checked back on Tikiman's site to make sure I right about it being the Poly before I publicly stuck my tongue out at you for mixing them up, and it turns out that the rooms for both hotels were manufactured miles away, trucked in, and stacked up like BA Legos (I decided to keep my tongue where it's at).

AV hit on my next biggest point... immersive theming that attempted to place you somewhere and/or somewhen else was a new direction at the time (this kind of ties in to one of my past arguments concerning the Values... they don't try to put you anywhere/anywhen other than in a hotel in Florida. The other resorts may be derivations of the Poly and C's innovative brand of theming, but the Values even gave up on that. But I digress...).

So not many of the resorts are really "innovative," and even the once innovative aspects of the Poly and the C are now commonplace.

I'm still not sure what we hope to gain, here. The fact that the WL isn't innovative doesn't keep it from being my favorite WDW resort. Being innovative in some aspect or another won't raise or lower anyone's opinion of a given resort. Innovation is certainly a facet of Disney Magic; it's not the whole gem.

Jeff

[Lesley]

WDWHound...I would love if you were right. I disagree that the focus should be quality and long term investment though....the focus should be, needs to be, creative vision. Acts of creating for the sake of creating. Artistry...the love and excitement of making dreams a reality.

But from what I can see....a "company" especially one that has become what Disney (trademark) has can't really do that these days. I would love to see them try even if it were a failure, but they won't try because its not what business does. Individuals with dreams and creativity make the wonderful things happen. And its highly unlikely that someone with the level of vision necessary could become the head of the Disney company....to get that job you need to be a businessman.

I don't know much about TDS as far as how it actually got built...but wasn't the major force behind it one man?

I still assert that the difference is in motivation...the "why" behind the projects...until that motive changes, which I seriously doubt it will, there will be no improvement. Anyone care to comment on this? Or should there be yet another new thread?

[Another Voice]

"...the reality is that sometimes "ideas" cannot realistically be turned into reality. "

But isn't that "Disney magic". How easy it is to give up.

[raidermatt]

Raidermatt, how can you compare AKL to the George Forman Grill. That's a first.

I don't know. I was just trying to think of something truly innovative, I hadn't gone to lunch yet, and I was thinking about hamburgers. Now that I've had my hamburger (Fuddrucker's. Yum.), that does sound pretty lame.



...put the animals at the center of attention. Make it feel that the animals surround the guests rather than the hotel surrounds the animals. How about small clusters of rooms/villas surrounded by the grasslands? Or how about a safari tent in the middle of a clearing... Let me feed the animals, let me walk among them, let me do things that I can’t do
at a zoo or at a themed restaurant.

The PETA people would go nuts (about 100x more than they already are). Also, given the limited amount of guests that could partake of this experience, it would either cost a small fortune, or have a 20 year waiting list...

I get what you're saying, and what you describe, or something similar, would certainly be innovative. I just don't see it as being a practical choice.

Yes, themed hotels are everywhere, but most go for themes that are generally viewed as romantic, fantasy-like, or mystical. Africa fits this mold for very few people, and therefore is not a gimme. But from most reports, it adds to the diversity of WDW in a way that entertains and does not seem over-bearing.

[DVC-Landbaron]

Hey!!! I’m the one with the city job!!! Doesn’t anyone have to work today!

I hate when this happens. So many things pop into my head as I’m catching up and most are answered by someone else!! (Especially JJ and Sir Larry!) OK, here goes (warning – the first quote goes back to page #2!!) My good friend Captain Crook:If building a nice replica of an African Lodge in Central Florida isn't innovative, or importing African CM's, artwork & arifacts isn't innovative, or landscaping the area so properly that African CM's can't tell the difference between Disney & home isn't innovative, so be it. But building a zoo around a hotel has got to be innovative. I agree.

Uh? Whaddhe say?!?!

Yep! I agree.

The concept for AK isn't awesome?No! (well, that agreeing thing didn’t last long, did it?) It is somewhat innovative (yes I disagree slightly with my Lord Liege Sir Voice). But it falls short of awesome. Very, very, very well done. And even somewhat innovative (or at least “Disney” enough to sell me on the animals off the back porch concept). I give it a very strong thumbs up!! But NOT awesome!!

Next some issues with the paragraph address directly to me: Landbaron, I understand your view of me and that's ok. Captain!! I admire you. And I love your sense of humor. Out of everyone (including JJ and AV) I look forward to meeting up with you again this summer! I truly consider you a friend. I know many people don’t understand the relationship we have, and probably wonder why we blindly accept the verbal barbs we sling at each other. It has to do with mutual respect that goes far beyond our ability to even understand where the other is coming from. Besides, it’s hard not to like someone who is so logically challenged!! ;) But you of all people here, do know I'm not blind. You know I see and you know what I see, you just can't figure out how I get from point 'A' to 'E' without going through 'b, c & d' first…That was put perfectly! I don’t understand it at all!!!But seriously, if you guys don't think the AKL is Disney doing a bit of what Disney has always done (at its best)See!! It just this kind of thing. I was with you, 100%, until that parenthetical phrase was brought into the mix. It is not ‘at its best’!! That’s the whole point of this entire conversation.then there is no conversation to be had and I must again bring up the 'ulterior motive' possibility.And then further alienation continues with this nonsense!! Try getting to “E” by way of ‘b, c, and d’ and you may begin to grasp the subtlety of the discussion!!! ;) If Walt had done AK, there would be nothing, NOTHING that could compare with the accolades that would be being heaped upon this place... I daresay you are right. That would have placed it before my beloved Polly. Yes!! True innovation!!

And a final proposition for you, my dear Captain. Clear your brain for a second (not that it would take long) and forget about everything you’ve heard on this thread about what ‘could have been’. Now, let yourself go for a minute. Full flight of fancy. Imagination run wild! Just think what a guy like Walt would have done with a ‘resort with animals’ concept!! WOW!!! Now that thinking by way of ‘b, c, and d’!!!!

Scoop, my friend. Are you never in court!!! I blame you and JJ for the rapid growth of this thread!! (a lot good it does to have a city job!!!) Anyway:
It just befuddles me that several fellow posters anoint the freakin' Golf Resort as magical ("because it magically takes someone away to a...uh....GOLF RESORT?!?), yet finds fault with AKL?I know others jumped all over you, but I really couldn’t let it go. We’re not talking magic, of course. We’re talking innovative concepts. Quite a difference in my book.

AirLarry!:
I think it is unfair to criticize Mr. Voice's disappointment in What Could Have Been. If critiquing of this nature is done without bitterness, it is good for the Company. Anybody care to guess whether or not the Imagineers (instead of the Hotelleers) would have taken those treehouse villas from the golf course area and integrated them with the Savannah? They ran a monorail through a Polynesian village and a Cement Skyscraper, for Walt’s sake!WOW!!! Did you hit the nail on the head!! Exactly!! Imagineers should have had a crack at it. I think even AV’s description would have fallen short of their concepts!!!

Greg:
"Could have done more." Give me a situation anywhere, anytime where that isn't true Everything that was ever built, everything ever conceived could have been more.I agree. And that’s what’s fun about conversations in car #3. We question EVERYTHING!! We ‘blindly accept’ NOTHING!!! It’s fun to try and out-think the builders. To try and imagine it better. To tell you the truth, I never even considered anything such as AV described. But now that I hear it, I have to wonder why. Of course that doesn’t diminish the AKL, but it kind of gets you thinking what could have been if the Imagineers had had a go of it. Doesn’t it?

We take this very, very well done resort and think about in ‘magical’ terms. Is it a three run triple, an inside the park homerun or a Grand Slam??!! I think it’s fun. (and wouldn’t it be nice if this were all we had to talk about? Triples and grand slams? Instead we’re talking about strikeouts, infield fly rules and games called on account of rain!!)

Scoop, oh Scoop!! I likewise do not believe that Fort Wilderness was innovative because they simply created campsites or wilderness homes no different than any other existing types of campsites. To me Fort Wilderness is a wonderfully decorated campground but nothing innovative about it beyond its wonderful decorations.Someone mentioned temporal perspective! PLEASE!! I must have visited hundreds of ‘campsites’ before 1972. My parents dragged us to every state in the union (but seven). And I can garentee, honest to God, cross my heart, there was never anything, remotely as innovative as Fort Wilderness when it opened. NOTHING!!!! Please get off it!! You know not of what you speak!!!!

Larworth:
I guess my short answer is I wouldn't term AKL as tremendously innovative, but I also have no complaints about its addition.Ditto

Lesley:
I think I need a new car..... the magic is all but gone, but I'll continue to visit as long as I can still enjoy myself and sniff out little specks of pixie dust.Again… Ditto

[Captain Crook]

...I believe we have a first! A friendly conclusion to a well argued, well thought out thread! Way to go folks, my mouse ears are off to you all.:D
:smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:

[Testtrack321]

Holy crap, this is a first. All the other posts have eather...
a.) died in their sleep
b.) got locked
c.) got deleated
d.) lost their newness

[Safari Steve]

AKL is very well done it's my favorite hotel at Disney. I love it. But the problem is the same as always, it isn't revolutionary. It dosn't do anything brand new and exciting that expands the imagination.

To quote a guest's reply to my comment that she was staying at a really nice resort,
"It's a bed."
If a resort has to be COMPLETELY innovative, then the next one to open should have beds on the ceiling. That'd be new, exciting, and would certainly expand one's imagination. I'm not sure if that's what I want after a long day in a theme park, but hey, to each his own.
;)

-Steve