[Question] Sleep with Mickey, or no?

[sbk1234]

With the new Animation resort opening, I hear a lot of people talking about how Disney resorts should focus on the movies and characters, since that's "what people go to Disneyworld for." Personally, as nice as this new hotel is, and I'll likely try to stay there in the future, my favorite hotels on Disney property have nothing to do with Disney movies and characters.
My personal favorites, some I've stayed at, and some I've only toured, have been WIlderness Lodge, Dixie Landings, Polynesian. None of these have anything to do with Disney movies and characters, but do traonsport me to another place and time, which I feel goes hand in hand with a perfect Disneyworld vacation.

So, here's the question:
Do you prefer the idea of Disney hotels being based on Disney movies and characters, or is a theme hotel that simulates a specific environment/time what you look for in a Disney hotel?

[Chesire]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

I'm fine as long as it's not just another hotel, you know? (i.e. Contemporary).

[toonaspie]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

So, here's the question:
Do you prefer the idea of Disney hotels being based on Disney movies and characters, or is a theme hotel that simulates a specific environment/time what you look for in a Disney hotel?

I prefer the latter though I am an adult so I can understand how the former can be more appealing to kids. It's just that much of the theming, I think feels unnecessarily tacked on to the point where it doesn't feel much like a one of a kind experience and instead is just your typical kid's bedroom at home. I would like to see more of a combination of specific theme with subtle references to Disney characters that would fit that particular themed hotel. You can find this in some of the rooms at POR (not the Princess suites), and Animal Kingdom Lodge (which has some subtle TLK references).

[PSUMark]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

Wow, this is... ahem, quite the thread title. Hotel theming wasn't the first thing that popped into my mind when I read that.

ANYWAY.... I wouldn't say "I prefer no Disney characters at my Disney hotels" because I feel that characters can be tastefully brought into the experience. That said, I think the "in-your-face-ness" of the value resorts is a bit too much. I would much prefer Disney provide a themed experience that is "Disney" in the sense that it is quality and immersive rather than a hotel experience that is Disney in the sense that 50 ft character statues are hovering over the pool. I've always found that to be tacky, garish, and semi-unnerving.

[sbk1234]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

^^^Well put, PSUMark.

[Mr Wiggins]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

I would much prefer Disney provide a themed experience that is "Disney" in the sense that it is quality and immersive rather than a hotel experience that is Disney in the sense that 50 ft character statues are hovering over the pool. I've always found that to be tacky, garish, and semi-unnerving.

Exactly. There's no clearer demonstration of what Disney thinks "Disney" means than the gargantuan statues of the Dwarfs holding up the roof of the coldly corporate headquarters building in Burbank -- a grotesque misuse of the characters that completely misses their meaning, their soul and their heritage. In sensibility and style, it's pure Eisner.

[PBandJ]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

I think they should have a variety (like they have now) to appeal to all tastes. It would be nice to see the variety spread across all the price points, though. I'm on a Value budget, but I don't have kids, so I would like to see a Value resort with more tasteful theming. And I'm sure there are some families in the market for a luxury resort with some fun decor that appeals to kids.

[Chesire]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

Exactly. There's no clearer demonstration of what Disney thinks "Disney" means than the gargantuan statues of the Dwarfs holding up the roof of the coldly corporate headquarters building in Burbank -- a grotesque misuse of the characters that completely misses their meaning, their soul and their heritage. In sensibility and style, it's pure Eisner.

I've always loved the dwarves up there, weirdly.

I think it reminds the studio of it's humble beginnings, also symbolizing hard work (keeping up the roof of a building, for example), that Disney was founded on.

[PSUMark]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

Exactly. There's no clearer demonstration of what Disney thinks "Disney" means than the gargantuan statues of the Dwarfs holding up the roof of the coldly corporate headquarters building in Burbank -- a grotesque misuse of the characters that completely misses their meaning, their soul and their heritage. In sensibility and style, it's pure Eisner.

I've always loved the dwarves up there, weirdly.

I think it reminds the studio of it's humble beginnings, also symbolizing hard work (keeping up the roof of a building, for example), that Disney was founded on.

Here's what Roy E. Disney thought, quoted from the first page of the excellent Disney War by James B. Stewart:

Roy hated the "Team Disney" building designed by noted architect Michael Graves at Eisner's behest to serve as the Walt Disney Company's corporate headquarters. Though the monumental facade was leavened by bas-reliefs of the Seven Dwarfs in the pediment, Roy felt the building represented everything that was bloated and pretentious in the company that Eisner had created. As he did from time to time, Roy wondered what his uncle Walt would have thought. Walt's office was still there, in the modest old animation building. Eisner had used it as his own office before moving to the new headquarters. Now Roy had moved into it, preferring it to the Team Disney building, so barren and vast that he joked he had to leave a trail of bread crumbs to find his way out.

[Witches of Morva]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

ORDDU: Well, of course I prefer sleeping with the Disney characters over not sleeping with them--well, I'm not quite so interested in sleeping with Mickey, really. I think he'd be more comfortable sleeping with another mouse--such as Minnie. But I'm thinking more along the lines of Gaston, Prince Phillip, Prince Charming and of course my really BIG favorite--Tarzan!!! You simply CAN'T have too many of THOSE Disney characters in your room at night...

[seafaring_ghost]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

I rather the themed ones with the charachters, because that is something different relative to other hotels, which the more expensive ones resemble in my eyes.

[ORD84]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

Wow, this is... ahem, quite the thread title. Hotel theming wasn't the first thing that popped into my mind when I read that.

ANYWAY.... I wouldn't say "I prefer no Disney characters at my Disney hotels" because I feel that characters can be tastefully brought into the experience. That said, I think the "in-your-face-ness" of the value resorts is a bit too much. I would much prefer Disney provide a themed experience that is "Disney" in the sense that it is quality and immersive rather than a hotel experience that is Disney in the sense that 50 ft character statues are hovering over the pool. I've always found that to be tacky, garish, and semi-unnerving.

+1 on your whole post....


...this calls for a gif

[redrhino54]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

My opinon is this.....The AA rooms are designed primarily with kids in mind. If you dont like them, or any of the other themed rooms, there are plenty other choices. Myself, im looking forward to staying in Cars for a couple days, just because......lol

[PSUMark]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

"...where parents and the children could have fun together."

Have you ever heard a kid say, "this is boring" in regards to the Polynesian, or Port Orleans, or Wilderness Lodge, or Coronado Springs, or Ft Wilderness? I get that the values are designed with kids in mind, but that's true of the entire resort. "Kids" doesn't have to (and shouldn't) equal tacky/ugly.

"Adults are interested if you don't play down to the little 2 or 3 year olds or talk down. I don't believe in talking down to children. I don't believe in talking down to any certain segment. I like to kind of just talk in a general way to the audience. Children are always reaching." - Walt Disney

[Aotphks]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

My opinon is this.....The AA rooms are designed primarily with kids in mind. If you dont like them, or any of the other themed rooms, there are plenty other choices. Myself, im looking forward to staying in Cars for a couple days, just because......lol

Isn't everything they do at Disney World now a days designed primarily for kids? That is my gripe. As a mother or two, that's fine and dandy but what about us adults who actually put out our credit cards for the chance to enjoy the resort? Personally I find the economy hotels at Disney World to be tacky. I much rather enjoy the themed elegance of the other properties.. like the Contemporary or the Wilderness Lodge. Its a nice break and prevents character and magic overload.

[KingEric]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

I much rather a room, have amazing amenities, provide an experience that is 2nd to none. Having giant characters does not equal an experience second to none.

[Witches of Morva]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

ORDDU: Obviously you've never been with Tarzan or you wouldn't say such a thing, dear...

[wdwfan22]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

I feel the character themed rooms are tacky. I think the Art of Animation is gaudy and have no desire to ever stay there. I prefer theme of The Grand Floridian or Yacht/Beach Club for example. Suttle Disney character touches can be added, like for example the bedspreads at the Grand Floridian have a Disney touch. It's just not over the top and in your face. However it's different strokes for different folks, so those that love it give it to them.

[Disneylandfan85]

Re: Sleep with Mickey, or no?

Oh, I was under the impression that this poll was about whether or not you would actually sleep with Mickey. In any case, I'm neutral on the matter. I usually take what I get. I'm just disappointed there isn't a "don't care" or "neutral" option in the poll. That, I would've picked.