If I have to hug one more princess, I am going to hurl!

GeorgeG said:
We live just over an hour from all the parks and we have resident passes for WDW and Sea World. We went to Universal once and will not go back. Call me a Disney Snob if you must, but compared to WDW and Sea World, Universal is trash.

since you live in The Villages and consider Universal trash, let's look into your own backyard:

The Villages STD Sex Scandal
Old people and their sex

The big story in Central Florida was The Villages retirement community sex scandal.

Doctors at The Villages say STDs are, quote, "running rampant" among the elderly people in the retirement community. . . specifically, HPV and HERPES.

How big is the outbreak??? Dr. Colleen McQuade, a gynecologist at The Villages, says she's treating more cases of HPV and herpes today than she did back when she worked as a gynecologist in MIAMI!!!......

;)
 
tmt martins said:
I just think the kids in the ad are portrayed as to young for what they are coveying.

Yes I could see even a 12 -14 year old in that role but those kids look like they're 8 or 9.
8-9 sounds about right to me. My 8yo is completely over princesses. All of the girls we know were into princesses from about age 3 to 6 or so. dd wore a princess dress to two princess meals during the week of her 8th birthday, and she was one of the oldest who did so, both times. She said it felt a little dorky.

Not to say some 8-10 year olds don't still love the princesses, but on average, yea, I think they've usually outgrown the stage by then.

She was also totally over It's a Small World and Dumbo on the last trip, and mostly only wanted to ride the "thrill rides", and she's really not very adventurous at all, compared to other kids her age.
 
thelionqueen said:
I have the same feelings as your family. It was not an enjoyable experience for us at all I don't plan on going back anytime soon.

I thought the commerical was tacky and desperate.

The sales are slipping significantly @ US. To offer basically free tickets (kids are free w/paying adult +3 extra days) AND free rental car, to me screams desperation. It's not Disney for sure and some people like it for that reason, just not me.


If adding "perks" to visit is desperation, then Free Magical Express and Free dining is really desperation. :)

Who designed Universal: Ex Disney Imagineers. So, when you bash Universal, you are bashing those who designed Disney.

Who works at Universal: Many of the TM's at Universal also do double duty as CM's at WDW. So when you say that the TM's at Universal are rude and "that type of employee," You are also saying that the CM's at Disney are rude and "that type of employee".

Who visits Universal: Disney people. Just read these threads. Most who visit Universal are also visiting Disney. So when you bash the guests at Universal, you are also bashing the guests at Disney.

Lighten up people. Both Disney and Universal are out for one thing - to get as much of your hard-earned dollars as they can. They are nothing more than large corporations that cater to the bottom line - NOT you. They only people they answer to are their stockholders.

They are both beautiful, well done parks, each with something different to offer.

Walt was a genius. He created an extremely large "cult" mentality for a business. Just look at all the disciples here that will pronounce how awful another themepark is without ever stepping foot on the grounds.

Try it, you may just enjoy it. And we won't tell Walt :goodvibes
 

The Universal commerical where the mom says "I want to be closer to my kids" and then smashes her two kids' faces into her overly large uh..bosoms on the Jurassic Park ride cracks me up. :rotfl:

But I do find the commercials annoying. DH wants to go to Universal the next time we do a themepark vacation. But I just cannot get into it. Perhaps if they sent me a free video showing off the perks of visiting US/IOA..... :rolleyes1

TOV
 
goofy! said:
If adding "perks" to visit is desperation, then Free Magical Express and Free dining is really desperation. :)

Who designed Universal: Ex Disney Imagineers. So, when you bash Universal, you are bashing those who designed Disney.

Who works at Universal: Many of the TM's at Universal also do double duty as CM's at WDW. So when you say that the TM's at Universal are rude and "that type of employee," You are also saying that the CM's at Disney are rude and "that type of employee".

Who visits Universal: Disney people. Just read these threads. Most who visit Universal are also visiting Disney. So when you bash the guests at Universal, you are also bashing the guests at Disney.

Lighten up people. Both Disney and Universal are out for one thing - to get as much of your hard-earned dollars as they can. They are nothing more than large corporations that cater to the bottom line - NOT you. They only people they answer to are their stockholders.

They are both beautiful, well done parks, each with something different to offer.

Walt was a genius. He created an extremely large "cult" mentality for a business. Just look at all the disciples here that will pronounce how awful another themepark is without ever stepping foot on the grounds.

Try it, you may just enjoy it. And we won't tell Walt :goodvibes


not to mention, most of us in the area have AP's to both Universal and WDW. how shocking and cutting edge. I know TM's at Universal that have AP's to WDW, and CM's who have AP's to Universal, it's borderline ridiculous. stop the madness.

the blinders that some people on this thread wear simply amazes me. judging a resort you've never set foot into is one thing. brainwashing your kids to follow lockstep in your irrational decisions and delusions is another.
 
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 it’s “not Disney” (the same can be said when some people’s grievance with Disney parks is that “it’s 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 it’s 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 doesn’t have history. I think it’s 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. There’s 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 it’s unquestionably accepted to such a degree that it’s 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 isn’t “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 you’re 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 person’s 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 it’s 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, they’re not thinking, “This is so magical.” They’re thinking, “This is so cool!” And them having that degree of fun is what make’s it “magical” for me, whether it’s Disney or Universal.

After an amazing first trip to Orlando, my girlfriend and I couldn’t 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 that’s 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 isn’t “magical” is because it doesn’t “transport you to a different world”, but that’s not Universal’s intention. The coolest thing about Universal is that it’s a real working motion picture studio. You’re not supposed to really believe you’re in New York, or Hollywood or a World’s Fair, but in a studio’s 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.

That’s why it’s more acceptable to Universal to reference and even joke about Disney. I don’t see the new Universal commercial as an attack on Disney. Like I’ve 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 it’s definitely post-modern in many ways, so it’s 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, that’s 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 you’re 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 didn’t 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 it’s 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."
 
phamton said:
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 it’s “not Disney” (the same can be said when some people’s grievance with Disney parks is that “it’s 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 it’s 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 doesn’t have history. I think it’s time for a history lesson.

From the UniversalStudios.com history page:


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. There’s 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 it’s unquestionably accepted to such a degree that it’s 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 isn’t “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 you’re 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 person’s 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 it’s 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, they’re not thinking, “This is so magical.” They’re thinking, “This is so cool!” And them having that degree of fun is what make’s it “magical” for me, whether it’s Disney or Universal.

After an amazing first trip to Orlando, my girlfriend and I couldn’t 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 that’s 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 isn’t “magical” is because it doesn’t “transport you to a different world”, but that’s not Universal’s intention. The coolest thing about Universal is that it’s a real working motion picture studio. You’re not supposed to really believe you’re in New York, or Hollywood or a World’s Fair, but in a studio’s 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.

That’s why it’s more acceptable to Universal to reference and even joke about Disney. I don’t see the new Universal commercial as an attack on Disney. Like I’ve 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 it’s definitely post-modern in many ways, so it’s 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, that’s 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 you’re 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 didn’t 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 it’s 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."

Awesome post, phamtom. Please don't mind if I bookmark it and may reference or quote you in the future as well. Haha..

I totally feel the same way. I guess it's how I was brought up... I was brought up with both Disney and Universal. I still love them both but also have my opinions, criticisms, and preferences of both.
 
nerdboyrockstar said:
Awesome post, phamtom. Please don't mind if I bookmark it and may reference or quote you in the future as well. Haha..

I totally feel the same way. I guess it's how I was brought up... I was brought up with both Disney and Universal. I still love them both but also have my opinions, criticisms, and preferences of both.


same here, my parents worked at both WDW and Universal so I've spent a lot of time in both
 
Caradana said:
Advertisers work by one mantra - be remembered. It's not always about being liked, it's about being remembered.

::yes::

We have a product in the UK called 'Marmite'. They used to run an advert with the slogan (and song), 'I Love Marmite'. Problem was, not everyone did. In fact, some people downright hate Marmite. So, not too long after their next series of adverts ran with the song 'I Hate Marmite'.

No idea if sales went up, but it at least got me to try some of the darn stuff to see whether I LOVED or HATED it :rotfl:
 
I have only read the first page of this thread so forgive me if this has been said already, but this is my experience.
I have worked at both Universal and Disney and in the Universal orientation they never said anything negative about the competition, but in the Disney orientation every other sentence was talking about how much better they were than Universal and SW. They actually kept saying "Universal and SW". Disney's union is a joke and during the speech to try to get us to join the union, they gave alot of information about how "bad" the working conditions were at Universal which I knew wasn't true because I had worked there for a while at that point.
The whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth and the bashing continued through the training. What caught me off guard was that I thought that since it was Disney that they would put alot of training towards "customer is always right", but it was the exact opposite. The Disney folk made fun of the guests alot behind the scenes and as a long time Disney fan, it kinda blew the magic right away for me.
Just my 2 cents.
 
ozarkmom said:
You guys are late this was discussed to death on here a couple of months ago.

If this topic was done to death, why do you feel it necessary to discuss it now on the Universal section?
 
US and SW will always be 2nd and 3rd to Disney. US had a terrible 1st quarter and they are expected to cut back, layoff and stop plans for new rides.

I don't know why anyone compares US to Disney. It's like comparing Disney to a carnival. They are two separate animals. Disney has mostly attractions with some rides and US has mostly rides with few attractions.
 
Galahad said:
Neither Disney, nor Universal make most of their profit from "regulars" like folks on the DIS. They make their money by the hundreds of thousands that go each year on a once-in-a-lifetime or once-in-a-blue-moon visitor.

Totally agree. That's why talking to US myopics (as opposed to Disney myopics) they fail to see that the introduction of paid Express Passes is a kick in the teeth for their AP holders.
 
Maleficent13 said:
This is my feeling as well, and it's the reason I also detest political commercials. Why can't you tell me why I should vote FOR you, instead of telling me why I should vote AGAINST the other guy. I don't want to hear his shortcomings; I want to hear your strengths.

Unfortunately, it appears I am in the minority on that (politically, at least).

Agree. So you're not the only one. Usually commenting on others means you have little to offer yourself.
 
I always prefer seeing commercials in a positive light. I trully only have an issue with the first part about saying she was going to hurl. I also am not so keen on the new Pepsi commercials. Don't get me started on the political commercials either ;)

Just not what I enjoy watching and it does make me want to go there less.

I have been to IoA once, and I will never return. Not much to do at that park, and the coasters are only okay to me. I live in Ohio and have Cedar Point and KI though, so I am totally spoiled there!

I do want to try USF just to check it out. But really to go all the way down to FL for a park like that... not what I normally do. I'd rather stick closer to home and do our local parks.

Funny, this commercial keeps reminding me to check out our local ones and go there sometime soon :)
 
eclectics said:
Kind of a generality to blame that on advertising. Lots of other factors involved. If US thought the ad was ineffective, I think they would have pulled it a while ago.

My uninformed opinion...

I don't think the drop in attendance is a result of the ad, either. But, I think the ad is indicitive of their attitude and that's what's causing the drop in attendance.

They're making fun of the Disney "magic seekers." I am one of them, and I wouldn't go to a place that doesn't want me or is making fun of me.

I've been to US several times. I go every couple years to see what's new, then realize, they may have new "stuff" but they're the same US. I admit, they have some very promising attractions. But, there really is no "magic". It's no better than a 6 Flags. The staff is barely satisfactory - which is a huge advantage that WDW has. They tend to cater more to "thrill seekers" than WDW does. But, that gets you a lot of teens. Now, there's nothing wrong with teens, but overall (and we were all teens at one time) they tend not to be so... friendly, courteous, mature (at times), considerate, etc. That diminishes the experience for me.

When I am in WDW, I feel like I'm in another place, outside of the "real world". When I'm in US, I don't get that.

Two years ago, we went back to Sea World for the first time in probably 10 years - maybe more. Wow! Did THEY come around! I was very impressed with what they've accomplished. They're still not Disney (IMHO), but they've taken the lesson and applied it. Other than the attractions (which I think are superior at US), Sea World is more comparable to WDW than US.
 
helenabear said:
I trully only have an issue with the first part about saying she was going to hurl.

The "Hurl" is an inside joke for those who frequent the Universal parks. There is a t-shirt they sell by the Hulk coaster. It has a stick figure throwing up. There is a diagonal slash through the figure signifying the universal sign for 'No". Underneath it says "No Hurling." It looks like the typical warning signs they have at rides like No wheelchairs or No one with heart problems, etc.

It's just a funny t-shirt. The shirt was sold years before the commercial came out.
 
Gonz Of Lancashire said:
If this topic was done to death, why do you feel it necessary to discuss it now on the Universal section?
I actually made one post and in the post I stated that I was in a bad mood. I think it's ridiculous how some of the people go on and on. Good gawd it's a commercial. These are theme parks. Some people go to the both, some prefer one over the other. I can't imagine getting totally bent out of shape over a commercial.
 














Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE







New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top