650 million big ones...

[stego]

If you haven't heard, and been living under a rock, go on over to mice age and read what Al has got to say. I had to check the date to make sure it wasn't April 1. Big changes in store for the Disneyland resort, if he is even close to the mark. Not sure how razing Tom Sawyer island is going to go over.

 

[vonpluto]

If you haven't heard, and been living under a rock, go on over to mice age and read what Al has got to say. I had to check the date to make sure it wasn't April 1. Big changes in store for the Disneyland resort, if he is even close to the mark. Not sure how razing Tom Sawyer island is going to go over.

You know how it will go over with the Waltites. "OMG, Walt is spinning in his grave/cooler...blah, blah, blah"

It is an interesting concept, and I look forward to see how it plays out. If it works and Disney goes for the current cookie cutter/ride franchise thing, it could end up at WDW. Since TSI at the MK uses less than half of the island now, something could be added without affecting the current attraction. Maybe even add a Black Pearl to the river.

Synergy, gotta love it.

 

[MJMcBride]

Its about time. Hopefully they will do this with WDW

 

[raidermatt]

You know how it will go over with the Waltites. "OMG, Walt is spinning in his grave/cooler...blah, blah, blah"

Yeah, that'll help start a productive conversation.

 

[vonpluto]

Yeah, that'll help start a productive conversation.

Well, it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. I did have a good laugh over your response, which did hit the nail the head as to where these things always end up.

TSI may be or may not be a "WALT park icon", but talk about changing icons always ends up in a "pro-Walt/antiWalt" fist fight. Not my intention. On first read, I like the concept and do want to see how it plays out.

 

[Sarangel]

As with most things, it will depend largely on the execution. The biggest fear I have after reading the Lutz piece is what if he is right & imagineering is scrambling to fill the holes left by marketing? In my mind, that's no way to run a theme park.

Yes, TSI is a little used part of the park (both parks, actually), but I'm not sure that the current regeime can build something that people will want go to after all the hype of POC dies down (which it will, eventually). I'm cautiously optimistic about both the re-vamp of TSI and DCA - but I'll wait to see what actually occurs before I believe it to be good.

 

[ChrisFL]

I'm very optimistic about DCA's revamp.

From what it sounds like it will be addressing most of the problems I saw when I visited back in May.....such as no cohesive theme or time period, not really separated lands and just an overall cheap feel to it.

Im very anxious to know how they will fix it...it may not even be a bad idea to just change the name of the park altogether, though I doubt that will happen.

 

[Another Voice]

Don't book your tickets yet.

Plans to "save" California Adventure are more numerous than churro wagons. There is no way Disney Corporate is going to invest $650 million into an existing park - not when the returns in other places (like India) or in other businesses (like another billion dollar Pirate flick) far exceed what Disney thinks they'll get from building a trolley to Paradise Pier.

The first of October is also the beginning of a new fiscal year and when the budgets are in bloom. It's also the time of year when all those people at WDI and Attractions scurry around trying to save their jobs. Getting a few fans hyped up on all the wonders just waiting to be built is a way (a poor way) of trying to build some excitment and pressure. All the elements in Al's article are old - in some cases five years old.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

How many suicides in Hollywood every year?

 

[ChrisFL]

Don't book your tickets yet.

Plans to "save" California Adventure are more numerous than churro wagons. There is no way Disney Corporate is going to invest $650 million into an existing park - not when the returns in other places (like India) or in other businesses (like another billion dollar Pirate flick) far exceed what Disney thinks they'll get from building a trolley to Paradise Pier.

The first of October is also the beginning of a new fiscal year and when the budgets are in bloom. It's also the time of year when all those people at WDI and Attractions scurry around trying to save their jobs. Getting a few fans hyped up on all the wonders just waiting to be built is a way (a poor way) of trying to build some excitment and pressure. All the elements in Al's article are old - in some cases five years old.

that may be true but it also seems clear that just adding e-ticket rides won't save the park either. As far as Im aware, ToT hasn't drastically increased the number of guests in the park

 

[vonpluto]

Yes, TSI is a little used part of the park (both parks, actually), but I'm not sure that the current regeime can build something that people will want go to after all the hype of POC dies down (which it will, eventually). I'm cautiously optimistic about both the re-vamp of TSI and DCA - but I'll wait to see what actually occurs before I believe it to be good.

After reading this, all I can picture is a Winnie the Pirate Playground.

 

[Another Voice]

How many suicides in Hollywood every year?

It's even worse than that - they join Scientology.

As far as Im aware, ToT hasn't drastically increased the number of guests in the park.

That's exactly what's been happening since the beginning - Disney throws in a cheap, unoriginal and uninteresting addition. The AP holders rush to see it in the first two weeks, and then attendence falls to levels even lower than what it was before. Just adding more rides and putting in curbs to make "real" sidewalks isn't going to improve attendance at all.

California Adventure isn't an interesting place to visit. Open air limos and being flung around on an indistrial robot in a pretend Increadibles training center won't add interest either. In fact, it's making it worse by making DCA more of a cut rate amusement park - a shadow of Disneyland instead of a compliment.

Until Disney gets the right theme (and I'm not talking decorations) they won't be able to fix DCA.

...all I can picture is a Winnie the Pirate Playground.

That's pretty much the feeling around too. With no plans and no budget - and only a couple months to do it in, no one is hoping for the best. We'll get some name changes on signs, some props placed in caves, and a couple of actors to swish on the island. At least it will get that dumb pirate band/show/sing-along show out of New Orleans Square and safely removed from the public.

 

[MJMcBride]

Just adding more rides and putting in curbs to make "real" sidewalks isn't going to improve attendance at all.

I would think it would depend on the rides being added.

 

[Another Voice]

No - we already have all kinds of rides next door at Disneyland.

The problem is that more than two thirds of Disneyland's attendance come from Southern California. Why are supposed to be interested in a cheap amusement park that offers pretend versions of the place we already live?

That's the problem with the park's theme - if I want to see Hollywood Blvd. I can go to the real thing for free instead of dropping sixty-three bucks on Disney's cheap copy. DCA doesn't offer anything that the real world can't - and the real world's version is cheaper and better than what Disney offers.

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

I dont know about the Pirate Island theme. Being this is a movie the excitement about it can fade pretty quickly. A better bet might be something from Harry Potter or A Series of Unfortunate Events or any other popular kid series. Kids read books for a fairly long time....movies fade from view unless for some reason adults think this is something they want to get for the kids for years to come. In fact....making it the island from Lost might work longer than something from Pirates. At least there is some detail to work with.

 

[MJMcBride]

No - we already have all kinds of rides next door at Disneyland.

The problem is that more than two thirds of Disneyland's attendance come from Southern California. Why are supposed to be interested in a cheap amusement park that offers pretend versions of the place we already live?

That's the problem with the park's theme - if I want to see Hollywood Blvd. I can go to the real thing for free instead of dropping sixty-three bucks on Disney's cheap copy. DCA doesn't offer anything that the real world can't - and the real world's version is cheaper and better than what Disney offers.

I don't know. If you build incredibly imagineered attractions it will draw people despite the overall Cali theme. But generally I understand your point.

 

[ChrisFL]

I still think DCA can be fixed if they went back to what makes their other parks successful....making you feel like you're in another place or at LEAST another time period. There is no real prevalent themes or areas in DCA, except maybe the carnival in Paradise Pier, and even that could be turned very easily into a period area, like 1930's style or something.

The rest seems thrown together with random songs about California thrown in, just in case you forgot the state you're in by any chance. Its very tacky and it seems like the California theme is kinda pushed down your throat, which Im sure makes the locals even less enthused about it.

Sigh....All in favor of tearing down DCA and starting over say "I"

 

[Another Voice]

The rest seems thrown together with random songs about California thrown in, just in case you forgot the state you're in by any chance.

In fact, California Adventure really is a collection of ideas for other projects that had been floating around the company for a long time.

Paradise Pier is the original concept for the Boardwalk section of WDW. Michael Eisner had this thing for Coney Island (the joke around the company was that he had overheard all the family servants talking about it growing up and was still upset daddy had never told the chauffer to take little Mikey there). A Boardwalk amusement zone ended up in plans at one time or another for WDW, for Euro Disney, for Disney’s America, for the Disney/MGM Studios Backlot in Burbank and at Port Disney. Sure, California had a couple of ocean side parks in the early twentieth century, but it’s not something people think about when they hear “California”. DCA was Eisner’s chance to finally get his project built and so it happened.

The Hollywood Blvd. Section is identical to the plan for the Disney/MGM Studios Backlot project in Burbank, except the old plan had a clone of ‘Great Moments at the Movies’ – er, I meant ‘The Great Movie Ride’ (So Eisner’s son would know it was a ride). The old farm exhibits and the Grizzly Mountain river ride were direct lifts from Disney’s America – only Lewis and Clark were kicked out and nothing much was put in their spots along the river. The only original bits are the Whoopie Goldberg movie (titled ‘We’re all victims of The Man here in California’) and overbuilt restaurants that Wolfgang Puck and Mondovi were conned into building and believing hordes of fashionable yuppies would wallow in the irony of eating $75 sushi next to a roller coaster.

The “California” aspect was just a thin layer of paint to cover over the slapdash nature of the place. Another company joke said the DCA was Disney’s first park built entirely with computer assisted design software. It took an entire afternoon and a copy of ‘Rollercoaster Tycoon’.

The real killer for the project, however, was the overall attitude Disney management took to it. The place was built by and for people who thought they were too good for Disneyland. Michael Eisner himself made the famous quote about with California Adventure they finally had a place that his wife and her friends would actually want to visit. At the same time, they figured that anything with the Disney brand on it would sell to all us brand loyalists.

They honestly thought that "Disney" was more iimportant than quality - that we buy the brand not the product. Upper management truly dislikes people who go to the theme parks – Disney has developed a nasty mixture of Hollywood arrogance combined with Manhattan Island snobbery. It shows in almost everything they do. Even the chief designer of California Adventure blamed its failure on the public – we’re too stupid to understand the hip, cool and cutting edge irony of the park. DCA turned into a game of how little they could offer but still make it "brand" enough to attract the "WalMart shoppers" to buy an annual pass.

What all this means is that fixing the park is a massive undertaking. The place is flawed down to its very core. It’s not a matter of adding enough rides –the whole background and underpinning of the park has to be changed. The most basic rule in show business is “understand your audience”. Walt was a genius because he understood us better then we did, that’s the “magic” of Disneyland – it’s full of wonder in ways we never could have anticipated. DCA was a creation by people who didn’t understand us – and who had no respect for us. Disneyland enchants its guests, DCA panders after our money.

Until that’s fixed, no ‘Midway Madness’ or ‘Phiarmagic’ or place making is going to work.

 

[raidermatt]

Well, that about covers DCA.


Reagarding TS Island, I'm not necessarily averse to changing it to a "pirate island". I'm not sure it couldn't be updated with its current theme, but pirates can work as well.

As long as its not TOO focused on movie specifics, I'm not particularly worried about the pirate craze dying out. The ride has been popular through the decades when we were told people no longer cared about pirates. Remember, that was one of the criticisms of Disney even making Curse of the Black Pearl... nobody wanted a pirate movie. (just like nobody wants a musical, a fantasy trilogy featuring characters with hairy feet, an animated princess movie, or a hand drawn cartoon, etc.)

Turns out if you make a good movie, people will go see it. Huh. Go figure.

So, if they do this right, it won't matter if interest in Captain Jack Flambe wanes. If the section is done well, with good story, excitment and adventure, it can flourish for a long time.

But that's where it gets dicey, and my concerns are similar to Sara's. This is a case of marketing saying "give me a pirate deal to take advantage of movie tie-in opportunities". That's not likely to yield optimal results.

There are some other specific concerns. Its supposed to be the Rivers of America, but I guess that's out the window if the island goes pirate. How will that fit in with the other sections? What if the third movie disappoints? Will they really even try to do this right, or will it be a cheap overlay?

 

[MJMcBride]

I agree, raidermatt, with what you say. I would point out that to me this area was not all that interesting to begin with. Its not like they taking away something great.