[Chat] One day, Disneyland WILL be a museum

[DisneySpaceAce]

And not in a good way. I feel like at some point, the cost vs return of adding new attractions or plussing current ones won't be "worth it" to the bean counters, they'll have maximized the amount of people coming in, etc and will just market Disneyland as a "retro" experience. I can't say when of course, but I feel like that will be the end game for how the company has been treating the parks.

[micromind]

You're not the only one..........

With the covid, it might be sooner than we think.

But yes, there is a limit on how much they can continue to shaft the guests until too many will say 'enough is enough'. When that happens, getting said guests back will be nearly impossible.

I'm actually one of them......several years ago, the crowds became unbearable and made the overall experience not worth the $$$ and stress so I spent my vacation $$$$ on other stuff. I found the other stuff (Hawaii, Mexico, etc.) every bit as enjoyable as a trip to DL.

It will be very difficult for DL to get me back; not impossible, just really difficult.

[Spongeocto4]

And not in a good way. I feel like at some point, the cost vs return of adding new attractions or plussing current ones won't be "worth it" to the bean counters, they'll have maximized the amount of people coming in, etc and will just market Disneyland as a "retro" experience. I can't say when of course, but I feel like that will be the end game for how the company has been treating the parks.

They just announced their intentions of expanding the resort in the near future. That seems like the exact opposite of your point.

[Eagleman]

It will be very difficult for DL to get me back; not impossible, just really difficult.

All what going on....I know I still can wait..........
The worth is not there -------At this point

[Mr Wiggins]

They just announced their intentions of expanding the resort in the near future. That seems like the exact opposite of your point.

True, although another possibility of Disney's announcement is that it's purely a trial balloon -- or even a publicity tactic. In any event, there's zero assurance that it will become reality.

[Eagleman]

True, although another possibility of Disney's announcement is that it's purely a trial balloon -- or even a publicity tactic. In any event, there's zero assurance that it will become reality.

I agree....
By reading the NEWS
IMO = I see more as a publicity tactic.....with the city.
We all seen many concept come and go ,specially in that area of the resort
and only become reality, when we see it !

[Dustysage]

In my opinion, as long as theme parks continue to make money, there will always be an attempt to replace things which don't draw new visitors with new things which will. So, there will never be a shortage of things for us to complain about that are going away which WE are nostalgic about but which young folks coming up, who are the park's real focus, don't care about. If theme parks stopped being worth maintaining and keeping fresh, Disney would be much more likely to simple sell them and make the licensing money than operate them as a dying business or as a museum.

[J. Thaddeus Toad]

And not in a good way. I feel like at some point, the cost vs return of adding new attractions or plussing current ones won't be "worth it" to the bean counters, they'll have maximized the amount of people coming in, etc and will just market Disneyland as a "retro" experience.

Not as long as there is competition from other theme parks.

[JLee1226]

Meh. I think the OP may be approaching a valid point but for the wrong reasoning.

Now look, I enjoy Mr. Toad's Wild Ride as much as the next Disneyland fan, but how much longer can we realistically expect a dark ride largely filled with 2d plywood cut outs to be a draw? In the world where VR experiences are increasingly commonplace, and amongst a generation raised on digital media (CGI, video games, etc), is Mr. Toad's really a compelling theme park experience? Or are most of us just riding for nostalgia already?

I don't think the issue is an unwillingness on Disney's part to upgrade or add new elements. I think the issue is the tension between nostalgia and "Disneyland will never be completed." E.G. the fervor generated by someone posting that they merely heard a rumor about POTC being replaced. To not even mention Splash Mountain or another attraction involving boats.

I understand and even share some of the budgetary criticisms, but ultimately don't fall on the side which feels the park is apparently being left to rot or that execs are 'shafting' guests. That seems rather hyperbolic and doesn't reflect my most recent trips. Everyone wants to pay less for tickets and wants Disney to do more for that money. Yeah, that'd be nice, but it doesn't work that way.

Do kinda have to chuckle at "difficult to get me back." Disneyland demand is not the issue they're having right now.

[merlinjones]

http://imagineerebirth.blogspot.com/2006/06/disneyland-is-not-museum.html

[greenalfonzo]

I hope Disneyland always features attractions which are a mix of different eras and technology. I really like that rides from the 1950s and 1960s can survive and be draws right next to rides from the 2020s. Some of these rides and their technologies should really be considered as historic landmarks and preserved as such. So yeah, museums aren't all bad.

[Brian PieGuy]

I hope Disneyland always features attractions which are a mix of different eras and technology. I really like that rides from the 1950s and 1960s can survive and be draws right next to rides from the 2020s. Some of these rides and their technologies should really be considered as historic landmarks and preserved as such. So yeah, museums aren't all bad.

I agree that part of the appeal of Disneyland is the history of the attractions. When I go on the Matterhorn Bobsleds there is an inherent "coolness" about riding the first steel rollercoaster, or going on its a small world and knowing thousands of guests rode it in New York during a worlds fair. Does this mean these attractions are necessarily better than the modern attractions? No, but their presence does add a lot to the overall experience of Disneyland in my opinion.

[linkeq2001]

The biggest hurdle the parks will ever have to overcome is the inevitable improvements to VR tech. If we get to a point where every home can have an affordable and ultra realistic VR entertainment unit. or one for each family member, the parks will likely be in trouble as they currently stand. If they ever hit a point where younger audiences would rather sit at home rather than come to the parks there will likely be a pretty big pivot to marketing as a pure retro nostalgia experience. Who knows when that becomes true though, could be five years, could be twenty or more.

[Brian PieGuy]

The biggest hurdle the parks will ever have to overcome is the inevitable improvements to VR tech. If we get to a point where every home can have an affordable and ultra realistic VR entertainment unit. or one for each family member, the parks will likely be in trouble as they currently stand. If they ever hit a point where younger audiences would rather sit at home rather than come to the parks there will likely be a pretty big pivot to marketing as a pure retro nostalgia experience. Who knows when that becomes true though, could be five years, could be twenty or more.

This may very well be the case in the future, but for me personally, the proliferation of technology in work and everyday life makes a place like Disneyland all the more appealing. Screen based attractions such as Millennium Falcon: Smugglers Run and Soarin' may lose their appeal as a result of VR, but attractions such as Pirates of the Caribbean or the Haunted Mansion will always be special to me. Going through the ride and being blown away time and time again by the elaborate sets, effects, and the sheer scale of the experience is something I will never get looking at a screen at home, at least I hope.

[linkeq2001]

This may very well be the case in the future, but for me personally, the proliferation of technology in work and everyday life makes a place like Disneyland all the more appealing. Screen based attractions such as Millennium Falcon: Smugglers Run and Soarin' may lose their appeal as a result of VR, but attractions such as Pirates of the Caribbean or the Haunted Mansion will always be special to me. Going through the ride and being blown away time and time again by the elaborate sets, effects, and the sheer scale of the experience is something I will never get looking at a screen at home, at least I hope.

I am of the same opinion, I much prefer the physical sets; there is a nostalgia tied to them and just in general I like the feeling of being transported away. It invokes particular emotions.

[Eagleman]

I agree that part of the appeal of Disneyland is the history of the attractions. When I go on the Matterhorn Bobsleds there is an inherent "coolness" about riding the first steel rollercoaster, or going on its a small world and knowing thousands of guests rode it in New York during a worlds fair. Does this mean these attractions are necessarily better than the modern attractions? No, but there presence does add a lot to the overall experience of Disneyland in my opinion.

I agree with you

[Karalora]

What I always question in these discussions is the use of the term "museum" as a pejorative. What on earth is wrong with museums? Every city in the world lists museums among its primary points of interest. To the extent that the purpose of a museum is preserve important things from history and culture, Disneyland should be a museum. Whatever else you might say about him, Walt Disney was an important shaper of 20th Century American culture, and Disneyland contains many of his great artistic achievements. Some items could, perhaps, be moved and preserved elsewhere, should the corporation decide they were no longer profitable enough to keep as they are, but many others couldn't, and their loss would be a literal loss to the world.

Sometimes, the sheer fact that something has survived for a given period of time gives it the right to survive longer, because it becomes a window to a time period that would otherwise be poorly remembered. This is especially true of Disneyland, the creation and early evolution of which involved as many happy accidents as polished plans. Those early attractions--what is left of them--show us how theme parks were invented. What could anyone invent that would be worth razing that?

[micromind]

I'd be ok with DL becoming a museum provided it was an interactive one that included all the rides being in operation.........

Actually, in a certain sense, it already is a 'museum' of sorts. One thing that sets it apart from any other theme park is its connection to our history. This is especially true with the older rides that have been there since the park was very young. Not many other parks can boast attractions that are around 60 years old........

[Zorro]

What I always question in these discussions is the use of the term "museum" as a pejorative. What on earth is wrong with museums? Every city in the world lists museums among its primary points of interest. To the extent that the purpose of a museum is preserve important things from history and culture, Disneyland should be a museum. Whatever else you might say about him, Walt Disney was an important shaper of 20th Century American culture, and Disneyland contains many of his great artistic achievements. Some items could, perhaps, be moved and preserved elsewhere, should the corporation decide they were no longer profitable enough to keep as they are, but many others couldn't, and their loss would be a literal loss to the world.

Sometimes, the sheer fact that something has survived for a given period of time gives it the right to survive longer, because it becomes a window to a time period that would otherwise be poorly remembered. This is especially true of Disneyland, the creation and early evolution of which involved as many happy accidents as polished plans. Those early attractions--what is left of them--show us how theme parks were invented. What could anyone invent that would be worth razing that?

Walt Disney did at least on one occasion refer to DL as a "museum of living facts." I've always thought that the whole "Disneyland isn't a museum" mantra to be a lazy strawman argument to shut down countering opinions, and yes, museums are often amazing places that use today's technology to illuminate the past. Let Disneyland embrace it's museum vibe.

[Eagleman]

Walt Disney did at least on one occasion refer to DL as a "museum of living facts." I've always thought that the whole "Disneyland isn't a museum" mantra to be a lazy strawman argument to shut down countering opinions, and yes, museums are often amazing places that use today's technology to illuminate the past. Let Disneyland embrace it's museum vibe.

I agree
The concept of Disneyland is not Museum
came from Michael Eisner, when Disney was opening Star Tour in Tomorrowland ~