Animal Kingdom a major Flop!

[lblume91]

We absolutely love Animal Kingdom!! I have had lots of people tell me they hated it though. I believe there are "zoo people" and "non-zoo people" in this world. If you are a zoo person, you'll appreciate everything AK does to entertain the family while spotlighting the animals. If you don't like zoos, skip AK altogether. We hit AK at least 2 or 3 times each trip. I am a Disney addict but have somehow never heard the backstory of Dinoland. I think it's cool!! I never really understood how it was supposed to fit in but didn't mind since Dinosaur is a family fave. Thanks for enlightening me!

 

[shelie girl]

Animal Kingdom was our favorite park. DD7 loved the character interaction at Camp Minnie Mickey. We all had a great time on the Safari and Kali River (even the grandparents) and enjoyed getting soaked because it was July! EE is one of the best rides at WDW and we even enjoyed DinoLand, mostly because of the Boneyard.

 

[charity]

We LOVE AK... So some others don't like it.... hey, that just make the park less crowed for us!

 

[kaytieeldr]

What most parks have is alot of little atracions to soak up the people, all DAK have is E ticket rides and shows. There really aren't any little rides to soak up the people.

DAK has a lot of "little" attractions. They're called animals. Look around next time - while the crowds are racing from KS to KRR to EE, hang around Discovery Island. There are a LOT of animals there, so close you can almost touch them.

Check out the trails. Wander through the entrance queue for ITtbaB - standing to the side, of course, so as not to get trampled - and look at the animals carved into the Tree of Life. By the way, do you know how many leaves have fallen/dropped from the tree since it was erected? I do. Do you know what the tree's infrastructure is?

Do you WANT to know? Or do you just want Animal Kingdom to be a park full of shows and big-ticket rides, that you race through in an attempt to fit in 'everything'?

Walt Disney always was in favor of the company spending money to add to the parks, and change things so they would not get old. It's been over 10 years an we have 1 new ride.

One at Animal Kingdom, one at DHS, three at Epcot, at least one at MK...

it still lacks something, which Disney knows because if it didn't it wouldn't close at 5 most of the year.

Sigh... no, it closes at five most of the year because the animals - the focus of the park - apparently have a "no work after sundown" clause in their contract.

I would love for you to go back and check for my grammar errors. I doubt you would find any more than the ones that you made, which I kindly pointed out. You obviously have a love for the "," and a hate for the ";".

I'd be happy to do that, if it wouldn't get me infraction points for sarcasm. However, in all probability, goreesha is referring at least in part to the omission of entire words.

If you want to get grammatically correct on me you would know that for the use of word like "however".

All punctuation goreesha used surrouding the conjuction 'however' is correct in the context in which the word was used. A semi-colon (and please note, each punctuation mark has a name) would be inappropriate and would only serve to confuse the reader.

 

[ILVPOOH]

AK is our least favorite park. There is nothing there we really like. I find it boring. We typically go for about 5 days to WDW with no park hoppers. 2 days MK, 2 day Epcot and 1 day Studios. If I were to go longer I probably would go for a 1/2 day, but since I'm not going longer, I don't want to waste a day's ticket at AK.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Actually, I did know that because Walt would have run the business into the ground from overspending, which I said in my original post in more or less words

Then there would be no parks, this discussion would be moot, and in fact this website wouldn't exist.

but without the imagination and exceptions of Walt we would not have what we have today.

Huh?

 

[TheWog]

DAK has



Sigh... no, it closes at five most of the year because the animals - the focus of the park - apparently have a "no work after sundown" clause in their contract

They must be Union

 

[kaytieeldr]

I'm not sure where the issue of "perfection" got raised. "Perfection" in this regard is a failure to imagine how things could be better. It's a rather pointless point of contention, really.

True. I don't see the point behind adding an imaginary land to a factual theme park. I don't argue with the creation of a Beastly Kingdom land, but since it's supposed to consist of animals that don't actually exist, well... maybe it would be more appropriate for FantasyLand in the Magic Kingdom.

 

[kaytieeldr]

In areas of Asia there are even gemstones embedded in the ground.

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT!!! They're not real gemstones!!!! Had to be said - just in case anyone reading the quoted post was tempted to bring prying tools...

 

[kaytieeldr]

I have to agree with the Op. I am not one of DAK's biggest fans, yet I do enjoy it.

Then, respectfully - you're not agreeing with the OP It's understood that this is not your favorite park, but you admit to enjoying it - therefore, it's not a flop in your eyes.

 

[Missytara]

Sigh... no, it closes at five most of the year because the animals - the focus of the park - apparently have a "no work after sundown" clause in their contract.

You gave me my chuckle for the day.

Thanks!

 

[kaytieeldr]

You're welcome. I had a much less PC response all typed, but then I remembered I don't want to risk an infraction

 

[WDSearcher]

True. I don't see the point behind adding an imaginary land to a factual theme park. I don't argue with the creation of a Beastly Kingdom land, but since it's supposed to consist of animals that don't actually exist, well... maybe it would be more appropriate for FantasyLand in the Magic Kingdom.

Animal Kingdom was designed to celebrate ALL animals -- living, extinct, real and imaginary. Hence, the dragon on the original DAK logo. All of the initial info about the park mentions that the animals of reality and imagination would both be included. DAK was never meant to only include real animals. (And, if you think about it, Dinoland is an imaginary land within a factual theme park. So is Camp Minnie-Mickey. And both of those fit in just fine. )

 

[TillyMarigold]

True. I don't see the point behind adding an imaginary land to a factual theme park. I don't argue with the creation of a Beastly Kingdom land, but since it's supposed to consist of animals that don't actually exist, well... maybe it would be more appropriate for FantasyLand in the Magic Kingdom.

Yeah, the "celebrating all animals, those that are, those that were, and those that never were" theme was really touted at the start. There was a unicorn statue in the water that you could see from the boat ride, as a placeholder to where Beastly Kingdom was going to be built. It's between Asia and Dinoland.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Animal Kingdom was designed to celebrate ALL animals -- living, extinct, real and imaginary.

Oh, I understand that. I don't see the point behind putting the land in Animal Kingdom. That doesn't mean doing so would be wrong, or that it wouldn't fit. It seems inaccurate to me.

But I wouldn't go around saying it'll make the park a flop, or that Disney ImanginEars don't know what they're doing. And I certainly wouldn't create a thread attempting to present my opinions as fact

 

[ols386]

The one thing I have to say that I do really like at AK, is that one display, well it's not really a display....you walk through it, and along the way in one section there are gorillas, and I think it's really interesting to watch them. There are others animals in the same attraction...tigers, deer, and some other stuff.

 

[selina4disney]

On one of our Dining with an Imagineer lunches, there were 8 of us eating with the imagineer. He asked what everyone's favorite park was. 5 people of the 8 said Animal Kingdom. At first thought that might surprise you, but I would guess that the majority of people who spend the $$ to do Dining with an Imagineer are those who do so because we really love the details and want to know more...we go so we can ask more questions and find out more behind the scenes info. I think many people who love Animal Kingdom are often those who see past the rides and shows and notice the paintings on the walls in Asia, the leaves and other debris and cracks in the pathways, the posters and other decor that truly make this an amazing Imagineering and theming feat. These same people (and I am one of them) probably are the same ones that stare up at the windows on Main Street, reading the names and recognizing some of them...some people go to Disney expecting a theme park and never realize there is so much more there...and that's what keeps me going back. Every time I go to any of the parks I see things I had missed before.

 

[AliceinHalloweentown]

On one of our Dining with an Imagineer lunches, there were 8 of us eating with the imagineer. He asked what everyone's favorite park was. 5 people of the 8 said Animal Kingdom. At first thought that might surprise you, but I would guess that the majority of people who spend the $$ to do Dining with an Imagineer are those who do so because we really love the details and want to know more...we go so we can ask more questions and find out more behind the scenes info. I think many people who love Animal Kingdom are often those who see past the rides and shows and notice the paintings on the walls in Asia, the leaves and other debris and cracks in the pathways, the posters and other decor that truly make this an amazing Imagineering and theming feat. These same people (and I am one of them) probably are the same ones that stare up at the windows on Main Street, reading the names and recognizing some of them...some people go to Disney expecting a theme park and never realize there is so much more there...and that's what keeps me going back. Every time I go to any of the parks I see things I had missed before.

I'm one of them too, nothing better to me than knowing the history and geniuses behind a park

 

[JennMouse32]

Actually, I did know that because Walt would have run the business into the ground from overspending, which I said in my original post in more or less words. He did it with Snow White and the building of Disneyland. He may have been cheap in terms the union, but he spent money on what he believed in. Roy was business savvy, thus he ran the company, but without the imagination and exceptions of Walt we would not have what we have today.

You will find fault in every post I make, even though in the next post you will say I'm right in other words. We obviously agree on somethings, but your attitude is trying on my nerves.

My post was to those saying that the park is perfect as is and shouldn't have any rides added, and yes there are those posters on here. I was not saying that it's a bad park, but unfinished. Do not test my knowledge on the subject of Walt, as I most likely know more than you just off the top of my head. Do not throw random facts at me as I will only use them to prove myself right, as I just did.

No park is ever truely finished.. least if they want to keep in busniess it isnt.. things change, ppl's tastes change.. technology changes..etc.. so no park is finsihed, not MK, Epcot, HS, none of them..​

 

[selina4disney]

I'm one of them too, nothing better to me than knowing the history and geniuses behind a park

Oh, YES! I love that too! Every time we take a tour or do Dining with an Imagineer it is the highlight of the trip and I can see more things with new eyes!