[Chat] Disney Doesn't Do well with New

[YoungImagineer]

DCA 1.0 tried to be hip and "stereotypical" of the Cali life. But we all know how that turned out. Somehow how always goes back to historical, and that us what seems to work. Thoughts?

[Dirton]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

It's not just disney, it's a nostalgic draw that all people have.

[Bronco21]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

History and nostalgia for a time now gone will always resonate with people. The here and now is mundane and boring (but wait 20 years and it's suddenly interesting?). This same problem is why Innoventions is unpopular. It showcases current products available. If it showcased upcoming products (at least 10 years out), it would be much more interesting and have less of a best buy feel to it. Modern (aka hip and edgy) is never as interesting as times past the future. Walt understood this which is why no part of Disneyland was based on the 1950's because it would seem boring compared to the other areas of the park that sparked curiosity.

[ChurroMan]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

It isn't a coincidence that the Disney "magical" feeling feels a lot like nostalgia. A world that feels lived in is a lot easier to assume when it existed.

[Peachy Poofs]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Walt understood this which is why no part of Disneyland was based on the 1950's because it would seem boring compared to the other areas of the park that sparked curiosity.

Main Street is supposed to be based on turn of the century 1900s, which is only 55 years earlier than the park opening, right? I'm sure there was a lot of nostalgia from parents/grandparents of the day. Do you think that would work today? What if they did it again today and built a land representative of around 1955? :thumbup: Do you think the baby boomers would have the same reaction?

[doppio]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Yes. And it would be cool.

[WorldDisney]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Well to be fair, EPCOT was always sold on being about the future, although certain attractions focused on the look back of things like Spaceship Earth, World of Motion, etc, but its not based in the past. And World Showcase is basically showing different countries in the contemporary and works pretty well IMO! And DAK is very contemporary as well, but not based on cosmopolitan settings, so it feels different even though its not set in the past.

To be honest I dont think its really JUST history and nostalgia so much as its also about the exotic and the unknown as well. I think thats why parks like TDS and DAK are my favorite parks because they do a great job of being about undeveloped lands and foreign cultures. Its also why I love Adventureland although its not that big, but DAK just feels like one big adventureland to me only with REAL animals!

But sure if we are just talking DL, I definitely agree! But I think DCA 1.0 problem wasnt just about being contemporary, it was also about trying to define a place it was already in and that was just BORING! If you define Hollywood in Florida for example, then its a little more interesting. Trying to define it at DCA when the real thing is 45 mins away just feels lazy and flat. NOW that they have a historical slant on it (although nothing has actually changed besides the title of the land and the trolly going through it) makes it a bit more interesting at least. But the California of today IN California theme just didnt work. It doesnt take you ANYWHERE and for me that was always part of the problem. If they did it in WDW, the reception mightve been better. But yes, Disney fans want to be taken somewhere else, if not a different time, then at least a different location!

At least DCA 2.0 now offers a different time, especially with BVS! I mean you never can COMPLETELY feel like you are in a different time with everyone carrying Iphones and wearing designer jeans lol, but you can at least get an impression of it and BVS does that in spades even with such a small footprint. DCA 2.0 in general really makes you appreciate the California of the past vs 1.0 that just insulted the California of today IMO!

[MrsMonroe]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

DCA 1.0 tried to be hip and "stereotypical" of the Cali life. But we all know how that turned out. Somehow how always goes back to historical, and that us what seems to work. Thoughts?

disney channel is a prime example

[Grin Without a Cat]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

History and nostalgia for a time now gone will always resonate with people. The here and now is mundane and boring (but wait 20 years and it's suddenly interesting?). This same problem is why Innoventions is unpopular. It showcases current products available. If it showcased upcoming products (at least 10 years out), it would be much more interesting and have less of a best buy feel to it. Modern (aka hip and edgy) is never as interesting as times past the future. Walt understood this which is why no part of Disneyland was based on the 1950's because it would seem boring compared to the other areas of the park that sparked curiosity.

Let us never forget what it says on the plaque over Disneyland's entry tunnel:
"Here you leave today and enter the world of yesterday, tomorrow, and fantasy."

[DisneyIPresume]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

"Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams and the hard facts that have created America..." -- Walt Disney.

Disney cannot do well with new because part of its very essence is -- or should I sadly say was -- its dedication to historical fact. Nostalgia, while not the only thing, is definitely a part of this.

[Bob Weaver]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Disney should be the originator of trends in theme parks and family entertainment, and should not be reacting to or reflecting current trends and fads. For me, this was the key difference between the "Walt era" and the "Eisner era." In the Walt era, they were making films that had never been made or even tried before, and a theme park that had never been attempted or even thought of before. Disney was the originator of concepts and trends in popular culture, at least the "family entertainment" part of culture. Films like "Mary Poppins" work for both children and adults in differnt ways. Well-designed attractions and lands appeal to kids and adults at the same time in different ways. With the Eisner era, though, the company stopped being the originator of ideas, concepts and trends and chose to just be a follower of trends, i.e., "Star Wars," Michael Jackson, "Indiana Jones," Tim Burton and Johnny Depp, visceral thrill rides and off-the-shelf rides given a coat of Disney paint, and so on. Eisner's quote that "Disneyland is about turning movies into rides" illustrates his simplistic view. You don't just turn a movie into a ride. Both the movie and the attraction spring from an original idea, not an idea purchased from someone else. During his tenure, the company stopped being original and started outsourcing ideas, trends and properties. Almost everything they did was an attempt to "cash in" on some trend in popular culture at that time. They need to realize that the company's true product is originality, and get back to their initial position as the originator of trends in popular culture, not just as a reflection of whatever is popular or trendy at the moment.

[SparkChaser]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Disney should be the originator of trends in theme parks and family entertainment, and should not be reacting to or reflecting current trends and fads. For me, this was the key difference between the "Walt era" and the "Eisner era." In the Walt era, they were making films that had never been made or even tried before, and a theme park that had never been attempted or even thought of before. Disney was the originator of concepts and trends in popular culture, at least the "family entertainment" part of culture.
Films like "Mary Poppins" work for both children and adults in differnt ways. Well-designed attractions and lands appeal to kids and adults at the same time in different ways. With the
Eisner era, though, the company stopped being the originator of ideas, concepts and trends and chose to just be a follower of trends, i.e., "Star Wars," Michael Jackson, "Indiana Jones,"
Tim Burton and Johnny Depp, visceral thrill rides and off-the-shelf rides given a coat of Disney paint, and so on. Eisner's quote that "Disneyland is about turning movies into rides" illustrates his simplistic view. You don't just turn a movie into a ride. Both the movie and the
attraction spring from an original idea, not an idea purchased from someone else. During his tenure, the company stopped being original and started outsourcing ideas, trends and properties. Almost everything they did was an attempt to "cash in" on some trend in popular
culture at that time. They need to realize that the company's true product is originality, and get back to their initial position as the originator of trends in popular culture, not just as a reflection of whatever is popular or trendy at the moment.

You are quite right with that, dont hold me too this but I liked SOME of his intentions during his Disney Decade. Personally I think he was more of a bad leader than anything, he greenlite good ideas but executed the projects horribly.

See ya walkin' right down the middle of o'l Main Street USA

[Ron W]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Main Street is supposed to be based on turn of the century 1900s, which is only 55 years earlier than the park opening, right? I'm sure there was a lot of nostalgia from parents/grandparents of the day. Do you think that would work today? What if they did it again today and built a land representative of around 1955? :thumbup: Do you think the baby boomers would have the same reaction?

While it's not exactly what you are describing, a lot of the charm of Cars Land is that it draws heavily from 50s & 60s California car culture and not just the movies.

A big part of the problem with theming to "now" is that "now" is always changing. The old west is always the old west but today's fashions, architecture, and music are constantly changing. What is trendy today is old and out of style tomorrow.

[mickeyfan42]

Re: Disney Doesn't Do well with New

Well to be fair, EPCOT was always sold on being about the future, although certain attractions focused on the look back of things like Spaceship Earth, World of Motion, etc, but its not based in the past. And World Showcase is basically showing different countries in the contemporary and works pretty well IMO! And DAK is very contemporary as well, but not based on cosmopolitan settings, so it feels different even though its not set in the past.

To be honest I dont think its really JUST history and nostalgia so much as its also about the exotic and the unknown as well. I think thats why parks like TDS and DAK are my favorite parks because they do a great job of being about undeveloped lands and foreign cultures. Its also why I love Adventureland although its not that big, but DAK just feels like one big adventureland to me only with REAL animals!

But sure if we are just talking DL, I definitely agree! But I think DCA 1.0 problem wasnt just about being contemporary, it was also about trying to define a place it was already in and that was just BORING! If you define Hollywood in Florida for example, then its a little more interesting. Trying to define it at DCA when the real thing is 45 mins away just feels lazy and flat. NOW that they have a historical slant on it (although nothing has actually changed besides the title of the land and the trolly going through it) makes it a bit more interesting at least. But the California of today IN California theme just didnt work. It doesnt take you ANYWHERE and for me that was always part of the problem. If they did it in WDW, the reception mightve been better. But yes, Disney fans want to be taken somewhere else, if not a different time, then at least a different location!

At least DCA 2.0 now offers a different time, especially with BVS! I mean you never can COMPLETELY feel like you are in a different time with everyone carrying Iphones and wearing designer jeans lol, but you can at least get an impression of it and BVS does that in spades even with such a small footprint. DCA 2.0 in general really makes you appreciate the California of the past vs 1.0 that just insulted the California of today IMO!

Ok, as a tourist in the lower end of the 99% I really wish that Disney wouldn't encourage the use of smartphones for everything. 1) I can't afford one so I can get no enjoyment from it. 2) it makes everyone be glued to their phones while on vacation (I always ignore my phone all day and only answer if the someone in my group is calling, and at that I normally bring radios). 3) I don't think Disney should encourage those that have smart phones to use them because then those w/out the funds for one will feel even poorer. (just my opinion on all these things)