DEBATE: When does the "Disney Experience" cease to exist?

[DVC-Landbaron]

Just plain talk.

Bold, CAPs, exclamation marks !!!!!!!!!!!, Large Font , and COLOR!!!!! don't make a rediculous argument any less rediculous.

And calling an argument ridiculous doesn’t automatically make it so. So how is it ridiculous? I don’t believe you said. You are very good at casting reckless aspersions. You’re not quite so good at backing them up.

DVC-Landbaron........we could discuss they myriad of ways you are WRONG!!!!! on this one, but I'd rather offer a plea bargain.

Nope! I want to hear the “myriad of ways”. Bring it on!!

Just plead guilty to letting tongue in cheek getting in the way

I am guilty of nothing. Again, bring it on. State your case or go away.

I don't think you want to go to trial

Oh, but I do! I really do!

It is quite an assumption that that is what you'd have today if the company was ravaged and split apart 18 years ago.

I’ll be glad to discuss anything you’d like after we clear up this other matter.

 

[ohanafamily]

Dear montessori, by "attacked" I did not mean a physical or vicious one; you both seem to care a lot about kids. You both seem to know a lot about kids. I really was trying to remind you of the statement in which it was noted that the ride could have been replaced by cardboard boxes...So, I guess I owe you all, even baron a big public
APOLOGY

I should have said that Baron made a somewhat sarcastic retort and drew a conclusion from what you had been writing. From your posts (some of which are 3 pages later) it seemed like you or the Professer took barons supposition as what the other had said. It sounded like things were heating up, so my intention was to clear up a misunderstanding. They say that no good deed goes unpunished, so please consider me apropriately chastised. once again...
I APOLOGIZE

Thank You!!!

BTW, I will be gone for a while...leaving for Orlando in a few hours. We are staying at US until Monday, and they charge by the minute for local calls/internet connections. While it is only $0.75 for the first minute, and $0.10 for each minute thereafter (if I remember correctly) at the rate this thread keeps groing, it could take me all night to catch up!!!!!

When we get to WDW there is only a $0.75 per call fee, so I will try to check back then...

 

[montessori]

It's okay Ohanafamily. I just wanted to make it clear that I didn't attack anyone.

Have a fun, safe, and productive Disney vacation!

 

[ohanafamily]

In answer to your question, yes we are taking him with us. His name is Nephosaurus. We are also taking his sister Neiceosaurus.

They are looking forward to AK, where their favorite restaraunt is the Breakfastosaurus (by the dinosaur ride)

I hope that answered your question

 

[DisneyKidds]

Soooooooooooo.................

You have decided to throw caution into the wind. So be it!! Let the trial begin!!!

Prosecution calls it's first witness............DVC-Landbaron.

Mr. Landbaron, if it would please the court, would you kindly tell us what the target audience was/is for the Aladdin's Magic Carpets ride in the Magic Kingdom located in Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida? You are familiar with the place, are you not? And please, we are asking you to identify the target audience, so to answer with an inanimate object, such as a wallet, will force me to request that the judge allow me to treat you as a hostile witness .

BTW ohanafamily - have a great trip .

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Let the trial begin!!!

Finally!

Mr. Landbaron, if it would please the court, would you kindly tell us what the target audience was/is for the Aladdin's Magic Carpets ride in the Magic Kingdom located in Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida?

Families, of course. WDW is a family place. Or has the philosophy changed so significantly that they are now ‘targeting’ market segments and demographics? How sad.

You are familiar with the place, are you not?

Yes.

And please, we are asking you to identify the target audience, so to answer with an inanimate object, such as a wallet

How easily confused you are. The ‘wallet’ is the goal of the project. ’Families’ would be the target audience.

will force me to request that the judge allow me to treat you as a hostile witness

You think I’m hostile now, just wait until tonight!*











* Obscure movie reference

 

[FantasticDisFamily]

Have fun Ohana family - BTW,

I ONLY agreed with Sir Baron that Disney was ripe for takeover, and that is a pretty well analyzed "fact". But we disagree heartily on the reason Mr. E kept it from being taken over. From my perspective he was a positive reason. He provided a strong leader figure that was approved of by the appropriate people. He had the recognition in the business world as someone who was innovative (hindsight might debate his degree of innovation but at the time he was described that way).

Rest easy and enjoy - we aren't approaching the apocaplypse yet.

The Professor

P.S. I didn't see Montessori's comments as an attack - did I miss something? (No need to answer and stir up issues already closed!)

 

[DisneyKidds]

Leave it to LB to tke the better part of a page for the simplest of answers - and it is still incomplete!!!!!

Yes, WDW is a family place. Walt created DL so that families would have a place that they could enjoy together. WDW was intended to meet the same goal. So stipulated.

Or has the philosophy changed so significantly that they are now ‘targeting’ market segments and demographics?

Must everything come down to perceived neagative motivations of a current management regime ? You are so tied up in philosophy, and proving the negative philosophy of the current regime, that you can't see the proverbial nose on your face. But on with the trial.

So, Mr. Landbaron, is it your position that every Disney ride must appeal to every member of every family? You have admitted your knowledge of WDW, so tell me about Space Mountain. This is a ride that was put in place by a management regime you find more palatable than the current. This is a ride that just about anyone would approve of as Disney. If you don't like Space Mountain, tell me about the Matterhorn in DL. What was the target audience for these rides? How about you tell me about Dumbo and the target audience for that ride, both in DL and WDW? Is it possible that having rides like Space Mountain and Dumbo, which clearly are targeted to different members within families, provide the balance that makes parks appeal to families in general? So I ask you again, what was the target audience for Aladdin? Which particular members of the family was the ride intended to excite the most? You can call it targeting market segments and demographics if you like, but don't attribute it to changed philosophy, as the same rides existed from the beginning of Disney theme parks.

PS. If it takes you this long to answer every question this is going to be a loooooooooong trial .

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Must everything come down to perceived neagative motivations of a current management regime ? You are so tied up in philosophy, and proving the negative philosophy of the current regime, that you can't see the proverbial nose on your face.

OBJECTION, your Honor!!! Really!! Is this the opening statement, the summation or is he questioning a witness!!?? If there’s a question in there I certainly can’t see it! It’s prejudicial!! I ask that we strike all personal remarks and opinions and ask the jury to disregard!! Thank you!

So, Mr. Landbaron, is it your position that every Disney ride must appeal to every member of every family?

No.

You have admitted your knowledge of WDW, so tell me about Space Mountain.

What would you like to know?

This is a ride that was put in place by a management regime you find more palatable than the current. This is a ride that just about anyone would approve of as Disney.

Your Honor Really!!!! More opinion from counsel!! Please tell him to stop and get on with the questions!!

If you don't like Space Mountain, tell me about the Matterhorn in DL.

Again, what would you like to know?

What was the target audience for these rides?

Ah! Finally a question!! Families!!

How about you tell me about Dumbo and the target audience for that ride, both in DL and WDW?

Famlies!!

Is it possible that having rides like Space Mountain and Dumbo, which clearly are targeted to different members within families, provide the balance that makes parks appeal to families in general?

Sure! So what?

So I ask you again, what was the target audience for Aladdin?

Objection!! Asked and answered!!

Which particular members of the family was the ride intended to excite the most?

Ah!! A totally different question!! And one you should have asked in the first place! It would have a saved an awful lot of time!!

You can call it targeting market segments and demographics if you like, but don't attribute it to changed philosophy, as the same rides existed from the beginning of Disney theme parks.

Again he prattles on without a question in sight!! Your honor!! PLEASE make him STOP!!!

PS. If it takes you this long to answer every question this is going to be a loooooooooong trial

Start asking the right questions!!

 

[BRERALEX]

THIS IS BETTER THEN SURVIVOR, BIG BROTHER, REAL WORLD, DAYS OF OUR LIVES, 90210, even better then LIFE w/ BONNIE

KEEP IT UP this is great.

 

[DisneyKidds]

More opinion from counsel!! Please tell him to stop and get on with the questions!!

Goes to motive, your honor. Redirect. Mr. LB, do you consider Space Mountain, the Matterhorn, and Dumbo rides that were put in place by a management regime you find more capable than current, who I believe you refer to as inept? Are these not rides that just about anyone would approve of as Disney?

Ah!! A totally different question!! And one you should have asked in the first place! It would have a saved an awful lot of time!!

If it is ok with your honor, I will decide which questions I ask, and in what order I ask them. While we were at it, rather than the defendant pointing out which questions are appropriate, how about he answers the question before the court. Again I ask, which particular members of the family was the Aladdin ride intended to excite the most?

Again he prattles on without a question in sight!! Your honor!! PLEASE make him STOP!!!

Establishes a bias and goes to motive your honor. Again, redirect. Mr. LB isn't it true that targeting market segments and demographics, as you call it, happened under Walt's philosophy and is not only attribute to changed philosophy, as is evidenced by the fact that rides targeted toward specific members within families have existed from the beginning of Disney theme parks?

Or has the philosophy changed so significantly that they are now ‘targeting’ market segments and demographics? How sad.

Your honor, I realize that in our virtual court room there is no way to prevent the defendant from using the stand as his personal pulpit. It appears that he will cry objection if ever the prosecution attempts to counter these personal preachings. In the future I ask your honor to direct the defendand to restrict his answers only to the questions asked.

Let's continue. There are many ways in which we can judge Disney attractions. We can look at their content, their quality, their popularity, the emotional response they ellicit, all things that contribute their overall success. There are many different ways we can evaluate how an attraction does on each of these counts. Would you agree?

So let's look at people's enjoyment of an attraction, which may or may not be a result of content, quality, emotional response, etc. Sure, one could try to analyze people's pshychological, emotional, and physiological responses to any attraction, but there is hardly time to do a full psychological and physical workup on each and every guest after each and every ride. Would you agree that would be inefficient as the sole means for assessing people's enjoyment of an attraction?

So if, for instance, we wanted to judge how much guests enjoyed Space Mountain, Test Track, Tower of Terror, RocknRoller Coaster, the Great Movie Ride, The Backstage Studio Tour (including Catastrophy Canyon), would we not get a good barometer by looking at how excited the people are before and after they experience the ride, how much they laugh, smile - even cry or barf? Are these not all indicators of how people are affected by these rides? Would you not consider people's reaction to these attractions to be one good, and readily available, means of judging if the attractions accomplished their goals of moving their audience and making the people who ride them have a good time?

Let's talk about fun, can we? Would you consider it a goal of Disney to provide fun for their theme park guests? Would you consider that the primary, or a secondary goal? If fun is not the primary goal, than what is the primary goal?

That is all for now, but I am not through with this witness...............

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Mr. LB, do you consider Space Mountain, the Matterhorn, and Dumbo rides that were put in place by a management regime you find more capable than current, who I believe you refer to as inept?

Yes.

Are these not rides that just about anyone would approve of as Disney?

I can’t answer for ‘just about anyone’. (I was very tempted to leave it like that and make you ask the question the right way, but in the interest of time I’ll answer it.) I consider them Disney.

While we were at it, rather than the defendant pointing out which questions are appropriate, how about he answers the question before the court.

(aside: Tee-hee!! Ha-ha!! And LOL!!! I knew it was rotten when I did it, but couldn’t help myself!! The very heart of your argument (or what you think is your argument) and I merely point out that it is finally the right question!! Come on, Kidds!! That’s good stuff!! But, sorry anyway!! )

Again I ask, which particular members of the family was the Aladdin ride intended to excite the most?

Children. Kids. OK? Happy now!?

Mr. LB isn't it true that targeting market segments and demographics, as you call it, happened under Walt's philosophy and is not only attribute to changed philosophy, as is evidenced by the fact that rides targeted toward specific members within families have existed from the beginning of Disney theme parks?

No. Seriously, I totally disagree! Sorry! (If you want to know why you have to ask another question!! Even Scoop would advise to answer ONLY what is asked!! Wouldn’t you Scoop!!??)

Your honor, I realize that in our virtual court room there is no way to prevent the defendant from using the stand as his personal pulpit. It appears that he will cry objection if ever the prosecution attempts to counter these personal preachings

Your Honor, may we approach the bench?

It is clear the prosecution does not understand the roles we have taken on. I am on the stand! I will answer all of his questions. I will go through the post line by line and answer only the questions asked! I will not get on a soapbox and I will not make speeches!

He is the prosecutor!! He is not allowed to talk directly to the jury. He is NOT allowed to pontificate, preach or slip in his message or hidden agenda! If he tries to do that I have the right to OBJECT!! Which is all I did in the previous post! (go back and re-read it, Mr. Kidds. That’s all I did!!) I gave no viewpoint. I did not try to further my cause! I just objected when he talked without asking a question!! Or , in some cases did ask a question with a biased preamble! That is objectionable!!!

In the future I ask your honor to direct the defendand to restrict his answers only to the questions asked.

Agreed! Or should I say, “so stipulated”!!

Let's continue. There are many ways in which we can judge Disney attractions. We can look at their content, their quality, their popularity, the emotional response they ellicit, all things that contribute their overall success. There are many different ways we can evaluate how an attraction does on each of these counts. Would you agree?

Your speech before the actual question lists some measures. I agree, but also stipulate that there are many, many more, some better than others. If you so stipulate I will give you a – Yes!

So let's look at people's enjoyment of an attraction, which may or may not be a result of content, quality, emotional response, etc. Sure, one could try to analyze people's pshychological, emotional, and physiological responses to any attraction, but there is hardly time to do a full psychological and physical workup on each and every guest after each and every ride. Would you agree that would be inefficient as the sole means for assessing people's enjoyment of an attraction?

Yes. (Man!! These questions are convoluted and just plain long!! How the heck am I going to answer as succinctly as possible if I agree to the basic premise, but disagree strongly with a single word or phrase!!?? You almost got a NO out of this one, just because of the wording!! Let’s try to be more concise!!)

So if, for instance, we wanted to judge how much guests enjoyed Space Mountain, Test Track, Tower of Terror, RocknRoller Coaster, the Great Movie Ride, The Backstage Studio Tour (including Catastrophy Canyon), would we not get a good barometer by looking at how excited the people are before and after they experience the ride, how much they laugh, smile - even cry or barf?

No!

Are these not all indicators of how people are affected by these rides?

Yes.

Would you not consider people's reaction to these attractions to be one good, and readily available, means of judging if the attractions accomplished their goals of moving their audience and making the people who ride them have a good time?

I don’t understand the question. Are you stating that the goal of a Disney ride is “moving their audience” (A term I’m comfortable answering without a little more definition) “and making the people who ride them have a good time”? Then no. Or are you saying that if you want to judge if people are having a good time you can watch their reactions? Then yes!

Let's talk about fun, can we?

Sure!

Would you consider it a goal of Disney to provide fun for their theme park guests?

Yes.

Would you consider that the primary, or a secondary goal?

Good God!! I have never consider that question before!! And it’s a good one! Hmmmm. (If I were really on the stand I would have to answer ‘I don’t know”. As it is I’ll take a twenty minute break and think about it for a spell …………………… ………………. …………………. ……………… OK! I’m back!!)Answer: No!

If fun is not the primary goal, than what is the primary goal?

To provide a “Disney” experience!!

Next question please!!

 

[raidermatt]

This is getting out of hand...

YYYYYEEEEEESSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!! When people get off of Aladdin, they are smiling. They had FUN!

But is that the only barometer for a Disney attraction? If so, then DK, you've got a lot more studying to do... your Disney education is not as far along as I thought.

When I go to the local Six Flags and Paramount parks (yes, I occasionally do), everyone is smiling! They are having fun!

Great. We've hit on one of the lowest common denominators for Six Flags, Paramount, and Disney.

You, DK, are using "fun" as proof that Aladdin is up to DISNEY snuff. But if that's enough, then the merry-go-round at the local carnival is also up to DISNEY snuff, because everyone who gets off of it has a great big smile on their face.

Can we move on to something that proves Aladdin is up to DISNEY standards? Unless of course you don't think their is a difference?

 

[Luv2Roam]

The primary goal of any company is make $. But that also goes hand in hand with customer satisfaction. (Part of the circle of business life. )
Aladdin up to Disney standards -- no way. (We rode it once and don't consider it worth standing in any line.)
I noticed now when I walk by I don't even look at it. It's just something to walk around to get elsewhere. And it's not like I see it a lot! I'm from Omaha!
Now if some local mall wanted to put the Aladdin ride in the middle, that would not surprise me.

 

[DisneyKidds]

(Sidebar with member of opposing counsels defense team .)

RM - we actually skipped opening statements. Had we done them I would have pointed out the many ways I would prove the defendant WRONG!!!!. I never said, or implied, that a smile was the barometer for an attraction being Disney. Baron took a statement, and in an attempt to make a point, inferred that. Had he taken the time to really think about the statement, and read a little closer, I sure hope he wouldn't have made the same remarks, but since he did he will be held accountable . Let's look at what I did say.......

How do we know it hit the target? I can only base my conclusions on my direct observations. First hand knowledge of the fact that young kids really enjoy the ride. They get excited about it. Go and watch.

Nowhere did I say a smile makes it Disney. Aladdin, and Disney, is about much more. A smile is only a symptom (as Baron likes to say) of a larger effect. Maybe I am writing too much because some seemed to have missed this.............

At once they can fly, they can be part of a favorite movie, they can be brave, they can laugh, they can smile, they can share a moment with their family, they can live out a small adventure.

Yes, fun and a smile are one aspect of that, and something you can get at Six Flags. However, all those other things are what make Disney 'Disney' for a child. I'm sure you can come up with even more. So, as you admit, as the Baron reluctantly is admitting, Aladdin (and I don't care about Aladdin - we can have the same discussion about Dumbo) was aimed at kids, and it does provide fun for kids, but it does more. It does all of those things I mention above, it sparks the imagination, it lets them be spit on by a camel, it lets them search for the jewels of Agrabah. As such, it simply hits the mark. Now that mark may be too simple for some 'sophisticated' adults, it may infringe on someone's fantasy of Adventureland, some people may not like it, but that doesn't change the fact that it hits the mark. And guess what, it doesn't matter if Disney sells some plush, or if the ride technology is old. That still doesn't change the fact that it hits the mark. One can focus on the smile only, but in doing so one discounts all of the other things these rides accomplish, especially when they say.....

So, maybe, given your Disney proving ground and measuring stick for what hits the ‘Disney’ mark, we should put a couple of cardboard boxes in the middle of the walkway and call it an attraction. Is that it?

And think about it, kids stop playing with boxes for the rudimentary pleasure of the cardboard shaped into a cube around the age of 2. As kids grow older they will still play with larger boxes, but if one doesn't realize the complexity of that play, that it is about so much more than the box, I don't care how many kids they had - they need to have more because they missed something. Older kids may do an 'Out of the Box' thing. They may use boxes in imaginitive play, to recreate childhood memories, or use the imagination those memories fostered to create new and magical imaginitive worlds. They may even recreate *gasp* their own little Disney World out of those boxes, with Dumbo, Pooh, Peter Pan, and yes - even Aladdin. Still want to imply that is analogous to the chaotic destruction of wrapping paper as these kids feverishly try and get to the box to simply arrange them on the ground? Really, if Disney wasn't all the things I mentioned above and more, would we really care so much about the place? I would not spend the time I do on these boards for something I can see for no more than a box.

DK, you've got a lot more studying to do... your Disney education is not as far along as I thought.

While I readily admit I can learn more, I am learning more every day - heck, I am even learning from you guys (as scary as that is ) - and that is saying a lot for someone with 15 years of Disney experience, my Disney education is going just fine and it may be some others around here that have a thing or two to learn. Perhaps if you are a father of X many kids, with XX nieces and nephews, it is just a matter of remembering something you learned a long time ago and seemed to have forgotten.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Let me try to be succinct. Let's summarize the testimony so far.

Aladdin, a ride very similar to Dumbo, and admitted 'Disney' attraction, is a ride that was targeted toward children. It ellicits a reaction in the children who ride it. Mostly is it smiles, which indicate that they are having a good time, but according to the defendant doesn't indicate enjoyment. Not sure what that means, but that is what we have so far.

So, Mr. LB, would you agree, yes or no - and only to the specific question, that Disney succeded in creating a ride, which is very similar to Dumbo, which accomplishes the goal of creating some kind of response in the children that ride it? If your answer is no, please elaborate.

Next I would submit that merely elliciting a response in a child, making the child have a good time, is not enough for Disney. Would you agree? Would you agree that a Disney attraction should create a deeper emotional response in the guest? It is what referred to earlier as moving the audience. Perhaps the ride should make the guest recall a previous enjoyable experience, make the guest recall a favorite animated feature, expose the guest to a different environment, have the guest experience all that with their family, thereby creating a new family memory of the experience. Would this be more important to the Disney experience than simply creating a ride that a guest has a good time on? Do you think that the Aladdin ride accomplishes this for it's intended audience - children? Is it possible that the smiles one observes on the faces of the children who experience this ride might be indicative of such an emotional response in some of the guests?

You indicated that providing a 'Disney' experience, not fun, is the primary Disney goal. Can you elaborate on what makes a 'Disney' experience? I ask you this, if all that you indicate makes a 'Disney' experience is present, but it isn't fun, will people return. Is it possible that fun must first be provided, closely followed by something that makes the experience uniquely Disney?

 

[FantasticDisFamily]

Ok, this has deteriorated into a courtroom setting - so NOT being an attorney, I am running away from this discussion as fast as possible.

The Professor

 

[DisneyKidds]

Awe, come on Prof, we're just having a little fun .

Really, forget about the courtroom setting, forget whether Aladdin intrudes on Adventureland, forget whether the ride technology is old, does the Aladdin help to conjure up visions of the film for a kid, does it allow them to pretend they are flying like Aladdin and Jasmine, does it create a memory, a Disney memory, for the children who ride it. That would hit the intended mark, no? Some may disagree with the mark altogether, and that is ok. Sure, people may criticize Aladdin (and could similarly criticize Dumbo), not without some merit perhaps, but Disney still acoomplished what it wanted to, what it had to - which is to create a uniquely Disney attraction that creates a memorable experience for children, regardless of what some adults think. Would you agree or disagree?

 

[montessori]

"Would you agree or disagree?"

I would agree to disagree!

I think the Aladdin ride has been discussed to death.

There MUST be something else to argue about.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

OK! This is getting silly. Let me try one last time since the right questions are NOT being asked!

Most of my car #3 brethren do not like Aladdin for a multitude of reasons. I think that you may have confused my motives with some of them. So in order to fully understand my position and to expunge the silly notion that I could possibly ‘belittle’ children (the only thing that I was defending myself against) I present the following:

The LandBaron “Official” Stance on Aladdin – the ride!

When the ride was announced, I was one of the few that agreed it was for the good. My reasoning was simple. It was an addition where no ride had been before. It could be a wonderful addition for the children in a land where kid enjoyment wasn’t exactly lacking, but where it was at a minimum.

I heard the argument that an “E” ticket should have been implemented instead. I thought that was rather silly! Not every ride or attraction needs to be an “E”. In fact I have always stated that we needed a couple more of the “A” through “D” types just to keep things new, fresh and lively. If they had demolished an “E” and given us Aladdin, I would NOT have been happy!! But they didn’t! It was an extra! A Plus!! And these days, those plusses are far and few between,

I heard the argument about selling plush and I wholeheartedly agreed with it. BUT, that didn’t necessarily mean the ride couldn’t be a benefit. Their motivations certainly could be used as an argument that Ei$ner was a knucklehead, but like the old adage, “it is an ill wind that blows nobody good”!! So their motivations be damned (even I can don the rosy eyewear once in a while)!! WE GOT AN EXTRA!! HURRAY!!!

But in the end, they blew it!! It is highly subjective I know, but in their desire to add this ‘fun’ thing, for whatever the reason, they didn’t take the time to carefully consider the impact that it would have on the surrounding area, traffic or theme concept! They took a Fantasyland theme concept and plopped it down in the middle of a land that used muted, real and exotic themes. It doesn’t appear as though they thought the traffic patterns through very carefully either.

Now you can call that wrong and you can disagree all you like. You can tell me it is the best theme anyone has EVER seen. And it’s still nothing more than your subjective opinion!! I would have preferred that the theme take on a more real tone, to match the existing surroundings. Make the camels look real, AA figure style, instead of caricatures of the animals (and they could still spit!). I would have preferred that muted colors be employed instead of the usual (at least lately) primary, cartoon color scheme that is currently there. I would have liked it to one side or the other to accommodate the flow of traffic. There are a whole bunch of things I subjectively feel they totally screwed up!! And lastly, I find that many, many others share my view! So my bottom line is that it is NOT a hit! At best it is so-so. If they thought that my theme would not convey the “Aladdin” movie theme well enough, well… THEN DON’T DO IT!! Remember: Do it right or don’t do it at all!! In my mind they took what could have been a wonderful plus, and cut so many corners or simply didn’t think it through enough, to make it a failure instead of the ‘hit’ it could have been. AND they marred the surrounding landscape very badly making it a jumble of themes, confusing, halting and erratic. My SUBJECTIVE opinion as to why Aladdin fails!!

Again, I understand that you do not agree. And that’s fine. But to tell me that it is a hit because it makes kids smile, or elicits an emotional reaction from them totally misses my (and everyone else who disagrees with you) point! And brings to mind the ‘box’ analogy. Kids like many things. Kids can become emotionally linked to many things. But very few of them can become “Disney” simply because of a kid’s attachment. And I stated that a kid can smile and enjoy and even get an emotional response from a box. And I asked if Disney should try that, since you seem to measure success from that fact. The simple truth is that it doesn’t matter at all if the ride accomplishes all it was supposed to do. There are too many other things wrong to call it a success! IN MY OPINION!! Can’t you grasp that!?!?!

In response you flogged both Montessori and me in a diatribe (specifically labeled “serious”) which was most uncalled for, stating that I specifically ‘belittled’ kids and tarnished the memory of Walt!! How insane is that?!?!?