Whew! A busy night.
In order I guess - you first Snacky.
You present quite the oxymoron
. You take some things way too far, while not going far enough on others. Lets discuss.....
First where you go too far.
Strip away ALL of the themeing, and look at the rides and shows. MGM and Animal Kingdom come up with substantially less than do the Magic Kingdom or Epcot.
This is the biggest problem with the LarryBaronSnackStack line of thought. You go way too far in dissecting something that can't be dissected. Or, if you find a way to dissect it you study the wrong anatomy. You simply can't do this. That is what HF is pointing out. A Disney theme park experience is not about just the rides. Anyone can do rides, even great ones. It is just as much the park that those rides are contained in that makes Disney 'Disney'. What makes YOU think that rides are the core defining element of a THEME park, especially a Disney THEME park? You talk like we are just supposed to accept that. The pot and the kettle have to come out of the cupboard as your assumption is just as subjective as anything else around here
. Agreed, the rides themselves, the mechanisms are not subjective - they are cold steel. However, the decision that the rides represent the core standard for the theme parks is very subjective. It is the same problem with the resort discussion. At least the DKPeterCrookFan camp is not afraid to use words like 'I'. You leave the word out and assume something is a given (YOUR opinion) that is not a given at all.
Try this out. Sit back from the screen. Take a deep breath. OK, another. Close your eyes and say these words. THEME PARK. Say it again, THEME PARK. A few more times - THEME PARK, THEME PARK, THEME PARK. OK, now tell me, what makes a THEME park a THEME park? Yes, it is THEME!!! Rides fit into a theme park, but it is THEME that differentiates it from an amusement park. So this statement........
If youre building a theme park, the heart of that park is rides.
..........is completely wrong. Walt invented the THEME park for the very distinct purpose of being different than an amusement park. Sure, he wanted to put new, better, innovative, quality rides and shows into that THEME park, but it is THEME that is central, not rides.
Now where you don't go far enough.
The it we are referring to is art. The art of creating not only a theme park, but a vacation destination. Because Walt Disney was first, and foremost an artist. The love of his art is what I am referring to. And he crafted his art carefully.
OK, lets agree that he loved art. He was an art appreciator. He did craft that art carefully. Fine. So you are saying that he created theme park art for the sake of art? He created artful theme parks so he would have something to look at? He created them for others to appreciate, like a picture on a wall? No. Take it a bit further. It doesn't even have to be conceptual thought. Walt said it himself - he created DL because he wanted to create a place that families could enjoy together. A place that was better than anything that existed at the time. That was his driving force in the theme park - not art itself. Sure, he made the parks artful, art was key in the implementation. However, they were about more than simply expressing his love for art.
As for you and Baron harping on cost/price, you are wrong. Go back just a few years and the 'mods' were just as full as any other hotel, without any additional discounts. Sure, now there are too many hotels rooms, partly due to overbuilding (a lot), and partly due to market conditions (a little). However, that sure wasn't the case 10 years ago. Furthermore, an excess of inventory today has nothing to do with the subject at hand the resort experience. As far as price, we can go around on that again, but I don't believe the prices are as exorbitant as you would have people believe. Are you implying that the Poly should be $77? Let me know so I can determine just how deluded you really are
.
As for answering your question without the word 'I', consider this. Do you honestly believe, because you don't type the letter, that every single thing you have written is nothing more than what you think, your opinion
. Don't fool yourself my friend
. Saying white is white is fact, black is black is fact. However saying that rides are the core defining element of a Disney park is not fact. Saying that the Poly specs represent the core defining element of a Disney resort is not fact. These are I think and I believe opinions. Yes, you may point to something you believe provides the basis for said opinion, but that doesnt make it so. Just because you dont use the phrases I think and I believe doesnt change what they are. So go back and read my answer. I state what I think and that is all any of us are doing. That doesnt represent subjective judgment like you are alluding to. As a matter of fact, I readily acknowledge when I make a subjective I like statement.
OK, more than a page and I have only responded to one post. Get comfortable folks!!
OK, on to Barn
Especially when a good double team action can really bury Mr. Kidds!!!
Bring it on pal/s. My ship has come in over the horizon. The Pirate
, Captain
, and HF
have shown up for the smack down tag team match
.
EPCOT is not less of anything! Different!! Very, very different, but certainly not less!!
Do we need to join in with Snacky and issue subjective opinion alerts? Sure, it is as big as MK, sure it has as many rides
..well, no it doesnt. It is innovative (but so is AK). But other than that
I wont go subjective, but lets just say Epcot is more to some and less to others and we can say that objectively. After all, Epcot doesnt have nearly the number of rides for kids as does the MK. One could say that, if the MK is the standard, parks should be measured up to the ratio of kids to adult rides and that ratio should be maintained. Nothing subjective about that at least not any more subjective than your definition of standard. So, despite the fact that Epcot is objectively less in at least one way (and trust me we could find more), I can accept Epcot as pure, unadulterated Disney. I can see it all, and evaluate accordingly, not clouded by what I have so made myself believe to be indisputable fact, things which are not necessarily facts at all.
A two day park, right from the opening bell!!
Combine this with your queen beds and 409 sq. ft. room and it becomes more and more apparent that the Pirate was not far off when he concluded that size is perhaps the most important factor in Disney
.
Now for the LB self created oxymoron, which is not really an oxymoron at all and is subconsciously how the Baron really feels
.
Can it still be a Disney experience? SURE!! Can we all have a different subjective outlook about the place? SURE!! But overall and very objectively it is LESS!!
For arguments sake lets agree that MGM is less. Objectively it is less in some ways, but it is also more in others. After all, we can go back further than the MK and DL to truly define the Walt Standard. He endeavored to create a place that the whole family could enjoy together. That is very much realized in DL and the MK. It really is not, to anywhere near the same degree, in Epcot. That Standard is more apparent in MGM. However, the key in this quote is that you readily admit that something can be less and still be a Disney experience (and it is no coincidence that Baron didnt use the trademark thingie
).
OH MY GOD!!! Why is it that you cant remain OBJECTIVE!!! IMHO!!!
Note to Baron read comments to Snacky above
.
As for AK better than Epcot
. Well, objectively (or at least as objective as you are) the theme is better, more all encompassing, more time and place. It is an innovative take on a combination theme park/zoo (what was that someone said about overwhelmingly groundbreaking?) While it may be smaller and have less rides/shows/attractions, it has a better mix of rides/shows/attractions for the whole family to enjoy together the whole reason Walt got into the theme park business in the first place. I could go on, but where AK is less, it makes up for it by being more in other ways. After all, a few people have said it is ok for something to be less in some ways so long more is given in others. AK certainly has grandeur. If you dont agree with that at least agree that grandeur is in the eye of the beholder. AK doesnt have scale, but I have said before bigger is not always better.
In case you havent noticed, hes a little bit dead!
So the clock stops and the World freezes and everything that is created that is not a rethemed version of what existed at time of death is off limits?
But were not talking about the entire experience.
Well, that is sure where we started, and where we should be, but you are subjectively choosing which pieces of the dissected frog we can do a post mortem on
.
OK whats next?
SNACKY SUBJECTIVE ALERT, SNACKY SUBJECTIVE ALERT, SNACKY SUBJECTIVE ALERT.
The point is that Epcot is something that is on par with the Magic Kingdom.
In some ways yes, in other ways no. On the whole
., oh wait, we cant look at it on the whole we need to look at the objective nuts and bolts
.
If they hadnt opened so many hotels, they wouldnt have tons of rooms to fill rooms that CANT be filled, and in order to compensate for those unfilled rooms, they wouldnt have had to jack up the rates. And thats fact.
Fact
Even if it were fact today, it wasnt ten years ago. Furthermore, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the experience. Wait, YOUR experience is ruined because YOU decree, I mean think, that the resorts are exorbitantly priced
.
Pirate
Maybe Mr. Kidds Or Mr. Horizon's Fan will want to respond to this further.
Hard to say more than you did. However, I did touch on it a bit
.
Baron
if this is how you are going to play, I am out
.
For them the Mods are the be all and end all. The definitive Disney experience.
But what I get is that the Mods are the same as the Poly!! Or that the Floridian is the Standard!!
I never said any of these things
. There is no be all, end all. There is a defining element, but not a definitive experience. YOU want to make it that way. Nothing is the same, everything is different. Less, more, same, different,
they are all Disney. I throw out some hypotheticals to point out how someone could come to a mistaken conclusion (ie. GF) and you come back with this cra
garbage
.
Again, you may disagree with what they thought was important
No, perhaps disagree with the single set of those few things YOU chose as what they thought was important, while ignoring all the rest.
This sentence alone convinces me that you need a bit of education about the good-old-days.
Whatever would we do if we didnt have the good-old-Baron to educate us?
Wait
now I see it!! Eureka!!! 12, not 10 dresser drawers and HDTV that is what Disney should be today
.
However, this does leave you lacking. No matter how you slice it, you dont have the perspective, or the experience, to truly KNOW. The best you can do is deliberately contemplate what it must have been like in the beginning of WDW.
And out cometh the true nature of the beast. The Disney superiority complex. The I know and you dont line of discussion and debate. Sheesh Id much rather stick to I like/I dont like stuff. At least it provides for interesting banter. You leave us without any real option for discussion
.
Are you the one that tells me that Wings has just as much magic as the Beatles, only in a different way? Or that the excitement level of a Wings concert is the same as a Beatles concert?
Well, if you dissect it enough and look at how the cords are struck, and how the vocal cords reverberate, sure it has just as much magic. Wait, can we not do that with music like we do with parks and resorts
Furthermore, the added excitement of the Beatles concert had a whole lot less to do with the music itself than it did with the hysteria the music created. That hysteria can never be recreated, but quality music can still be produced.
At once, Baron is the man of fact and philosophy. Well, philosophy, by definition, is learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical arts, the analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing fundamental beliefs, the theory underlying or regarding a sphere of activity or thought. Pretty subjective, huh? Fact has very little place in philosophy. Philosophy is very much interpretation and belief. Given that the sphere of activity you analyze ended 30+ years ago, you can keep your good old days. The world is a dynamic place my friend.
Nuf
Nah, you can keep the line
.
