I have saved my favorite post made by DocBosch (who ocassionally posts here) He wrote an amazing analysis so forgive me for reposting his words but I couldn't have said it better myself.
"The point has been made that these two rivals have created quality theme park destinations, and each should be enjoyed as such. The problem is that the Disney fans biggest complaint with Universal (consciously or subconsciously, literally or symbolically) is that its not Disney (the same can be said when some peoples grievance with Disney parks is that its Disney).
When you have a strong fondness for something, you tend to hold that something as the highest standard. The mistake comes when you try to totally discount that other entity entirely, not even considering it on its own merits. Yes Universal is not Disney. But it is Universal, and that says a whole lot in terms of quality and excellence.
Someone tried to infer that those who favor Universal lack a sense of history, implying that Universal doesnt have history. I think its time for a history lesson.
From the UniversalStudios.com history page:
Universal's rich entertainment legacy can be traced back to 1906, when 39 year-old Bavarian immigrant Carl Laemmle opened his first nickelodeon theater in Chicago. From exhibiting short silent movies in one theater, Laemmle later moved to movie distribution and production.
On June 8, 1912, Laemmle first incorporated the name "Universal" when he formed the Universal Film Manufacturing Company in New York. In March 1914, [Laemmle purchased] a 230-acre ranch [in the Los Angeles area]. This site was to become "the entertainment center of the world" - Universal City.
On March 15, 1915 Carl Laemmle officially opened the gates of Universal City, the world's first self-contained community dedicated to making movies. Laemmle also began inviting visitors to Universal City to observe his movie making, establishing Universal's long-standing tradition of welcoming guests to enjoy the behind-the-scenes magic.
Universal is responsible for some of the most memorable and iconic characters and films of the last 100 years of cinema. Carl Laemmle welcomed the first guest into Universal Studios a full 40 years before
Disneyland. When the Universal Tour was reinstated in the mid 60s, it featured new immersive attractions that were obviously inspired by the Disney theme park philosophy. Much like Walt wanted Disneyland guests to enter his animated fairytales, Universal was allowing people to both experiences their favorite films and witness the process behind creating them. Still today this is the main difference between the two different sides of the same coin.
Notice that the above blurb regarding Universal history ends with the word magic, which is what people claim Universal lacks. Theres an idea that the term magic is synonymous with the brand name Disney, when in reality, it should be that Disney, and anything else, should inspire magic. This is negated when its unquestionably accepted to such a degree that its even marketed in such a way.
The following is my reply to a Disney vs. Universal post at the Universal board that stated that Universal was a good enough place, a cool place, but that it just isnt magical:
Universal was my favorite park as a young child, mainly due to the presence of Back To The Future and my affinity to movie making. To this day, the Universal logo in front of movies gets to me. My dream is for my first film to be a Universal picture.
Universal became the park I visited the most, and one of the things I got most attached to as a kid. USF is literally my favorite place on earth. It's a place where I can recall various thoughts and feelings from different parts of my life just by walking around. Disney was too big and popular for it to feel personal, but Universal to me was something special.
The night they closed Kongfrontation, I started questioning my attachment to Universal. I figured that Disney had its supposed "magic" and history, things that youre allowed to value, but why did I have such strong feeling for Universal? They had just closed a classic attraction to replace it with a roller coaster. While Kong was iconic, the original ride was just meant to thrill, and when it stopped doing that, it would be replaced by a different movie's high tech ride. I wondered where the reminiscence was in that.
I walked around the USF lagoon at dusk for a bit, contemplating this, when I looked up at the view. I remembered the park as I used to see it as a kid. I remembered how it seemed huge, and how there was always something cool around the corner. I remembered being so impressed with the street facades, and the themeing within the rides. The first visit when I became completely and unreasonably upset that we had to leave, but when we returned soon after, I realized that this was a place I was going to be able to come back to constantly.
When I walked out of the park, I started to think about how there is so much more now then there was in my memories of my first visits. I tracked the expansion of the Universal property for over two years but I wondered if it had grown too much for me to genuinely care for it all. Then I looked over to the IOA skyline, with the lighthouse beaming and Hulk snaking all over the sky, and remembered how amazing it was. Then I looked at CityWalk, all lit up in the night, and remembered how amazing it was. And I remembered that the reason I liked Universal so much the first time was because it was so amazing.
The "nostalgia" of Universal isn't nostalgia at all, but innovation. Universal isn't about things staying the same forever, so we can relive our childhoods over and over again, but about things evolving and getting better, and getting 'cooler'. Disney is magical because of it's classic attractions, and the classic characters they are based on, while Universal's charm comes from it's ability to create spectacular things, regardless of the subject, that will amaze us.
Which is what makes my time at Universal magical.
What is magical is based on each persons personal experience, not on corporate branding or group ideology. Universal is magical for me for what I said above. Disney is magical to me because of Walt and what he accomplished and the creativity and imagination he and those he worked with possessed.
My five-year-old nieces are sometimes excited about Mickey and Minnie and the Princesses, and sometimes its all about Cat in the Hat and ET and Sponge Bob. And contrary to marketing efforts, when they get to meet Cinderella, or get to drive a car, or get to spin around in a giant teacup, theyre not thinking, This is so magical. Theyre thinking, This is so cool! And them having that degree of fun is what makes it magical for me, whether its Disney or Universal.
After an amazing first trip to Orlando, my girlfriend and I couldnt decide if we had a better time at Disney or Universal. Later I figured out why. Disney is this incredible, iconic place, much like Paris, that we got to experience and explore together. Universal is a place thats personal to me that I got to share with her, and it was great to have a lot of thrilling fun there together. Both places were great and magical, but each for different reasons.
Some say Universal isnt magical is because it doesnt transport you to a different world, but thats not Universals intention. The coolest thing about Universal is that its a real working motion picture studio. Youre not supposed to really believe youre in New York, or Hollywood or a Worlds Fair, but in a studios backlot reproductions. This has always been the most fascinating thing for me, to see how these cinematic illusions are created and how they work. While Disney parks are supposed to be a stage to perform on, Universal Studios is more like the behind-the-scenes peek. Islands of Adventure is their effort to create highly detailed, realistic other worlds, the Universal way.
Thats why its more acceptable to Universal to reference and even joke about Disney. I dont see the new Universal commercial as an attack on Disney. Like Ive said already, there are differences between the two places not related to quality or magic. All that Universal is doing is playing up that difference to attract those who want the difference. Universal is the hip, cool park, and its definitely post-modern in many ways, so its completely understandable for them to take such a jab at Disney, which they do all the time anyway.
The following is my reply to a Disney person complaining about the same thing, on the Universal board:
I've heard jokes about Disney at Universal, but they've always been sly and innocent, and not really hateful in any way. Disney will always be bigger and more popular, so Universal, as the underdog, is allowed to poke fun at their "big brother".
Universal references to Disney usually range from jabs in the ribs (The Mystic Fountain asking a little girl "Who's that stupid looking cartoon rat on your shirt? Why does your hat have satellite dishes?) to sarcastically comparative (After a gory effect in the Make-up Show: "I bet you won't see that at Disney!") to self detrimental (at the end of the Ghostbusters/Beetlejuice street show: "Ok, thats it folks. There's no more show. There's no curtain. We don't have that kind of budget. We're not Disney!").
These types of jokes are especially funny to people who like Disney. I personally consider the Disney-esque signs and posters in the Shrek and MIB queues as both humorous and attributing. You didn't expect this, and found it off putting, because youre used to Disney, and Disney doesn't do that at all. But you said it yourself, Universal is "hip", and it's hip to be witty and self aware.
Disney doesn't mention Universal at all, jokingly or not, and I wouldn't expect them to. Disney is too big. Disney's the establishment. They are above it. For Disney to mention Universal at all is to acknowledge Universal, and to acknowledge Universal, or anything outside the Disney World, is too un-Disney. To me, for Disney to make references to Universal or, say, Gator World, would completely take me out of the magical world of Disney.
Somebody said that they didnt like the idea of Universal attacking Disney with the ad, and that Disney would never do the same thing. But what about a Disney cast member berating me and putting down Universal because I was wearing a Universal shirt at a Disney park. Considering what Disney is supposed to stand for, I think its much worse for a cast member to verbally attack Universal, let alone even mention Universal inside a Disney park, then Universal having an advertising campaign that pokes fun at their competition."
