Another one bites the dust

[Honda Enoch]

You did. "Thought the parks may not belong to one character. it has always been Cinderella's Fantasyland at MK and Sleeping Beauty's Fantasyland at DL."

Yes it is their CASTLES and the castles are the gate ways to Fantasyland

Replacing the PeopleMovers with a new ride wasn't a bad idea in itself. The problem came from the bad mechanical design of the Rocket Rods that had them breaking down too often.

Your right. replacing original rides with new ones is the bests idea ever. Give them a few more years and EVERY original ride at Disney will be gone.

Even so, I haven't heard anything yet to make me think they are going to plow under every old attraction and show. I am not wearing rose-colored glasses, but I am beginning to suspect some folks are wearing jade-colored ones.

Then you have not been looking at Disney over the past 20 years.

...I have been trying ignore most of this thread's discussion, but I have to say that I would love it very much if Honda would stop insulting Disneyland. Because that in effect, insults Walt.

I am not insulting DL.

Walt loved Disneyland, he poured his heart and soul into building the place, and as it has now been established,

And no Walt did not LOVE DL. He hated the lack of space, he hated the final outcome of the park.

(and cited) Walt initially did not want to built a Magic Kingdom park in Florida because he felt there should only be one Disneyland, but he had to agree to it as it was the only way that he could start work on the Florida property. What he was really interested in was his idea for EPCOT.

And sorry to burst your bubble, but Walt planed to build a MK park in another location (ended up being Florida) from the day DL was opened.

And Disneyland is NOT as "cramped and claustrophobic" (quoted from another thread) as Honda (who has never set foot in the park) says. There are many open spaces in the park.

Of course it's not I mean you can only fit the entire DL resort inside WDW's MK. Not small and cramped at all.

OWNED!!!

I thought it was neat that while they removed a classic attraction to make way for a new one to be loved by the kids, they still left the classic available at another park. If you like Mr. Toad, you can visit that attraction at DLR and if you like the Country Bear Jamboree, you can see it at the MK. It seems like they tried to keep people happy while making changes to the parks.

Sure take away a classic and FORCE a person that likes it to fly across the country to go see it. And I would not say that's a good thing in the way of toad. toad at DL is not even half the size of the one that was at WDW.

[joanna71985]

I don't see what the need for all this arguing is for. DL is good, WDW is good, they are both good parks. I think it's nice that they have different attractions- gives people an excuse to visit the opposite coast (I know I've never been to DL, and am looking forward to going out there).

[Honda Enoch]

I don't see what the need for all this arguing is for. DL is good, WDW is good, they are both good parks. I think it's nice that they have different attractions- gives people an excuse to visit the opposite coast (I know I've never been to DL, and am looking forward to going out there).

So you think it's fair to people that can't travel across the country, for Disney to take their favorite rides away from their home park, making them miss out?

If Disney want to get people to visit both parks, then instead of removing things from one park, leaving them in another, They can just add NEW things (in the space they have, no need to remove classics). For example. DCA has things that WDW does not, Like the new cars land. That s something that would get east coast people to go to DL. They don't have to take rides away from WDW to make us go to DL to find them. And vice versa. I really feel bad that DL does not have a peoplemover anymore, especially since it was the original PM. It is one of the rides that is no where near like the WDW version. At least with Toad , though WDW's version was larger and more fast paced and exciting, the DL version can still give you a smaller yet still exciting version with the same experience. With the PM. They are 2 totally different beast. Other then the same name and concept of a "tour of Tomorrowland". DL PM had no roof, the cars were like Sky Way cars with wheels :) The roof would tilt to the side at load/unload, the movement system was wheels in the track with tires (originally sponsored by Good Year) that would rub the under side of the cars moving them along the track. Compare that to WDW PM. had a roof, the cars were totally different design, the movement system is mag lev design. Large magnets in the track push the cars along.

Anyway my point is that Disney can still attract people from both coast to both parks without having to destroy the beloved park we all grew up with.

[Mayonnaise]

This isn't about fair. Life is change, and it just isn't gonna ever be fair. Take a breather.

Guests do not own, and are not entitled to any attraction in the park. If it ceases to be available, they have not been robbed of anything they had a right to. They can't "take away" from you what you do not own, and this is comming from a fellow guest.

Was I bummed when they changed the Journey Into Imagination? Damn straight I was! (Well... the first time, the second time it got betterish.) Was I a bit tweaked when they messed around with the Enchanted Tiki Room? You bet! (Sorry Zazu!) But these things will happen, in the name of progress, and sitting around demanding that nothing ever change isn't going to make time stand still.

8^(

[Honda Enoch]

Guests do not own, and are not entitled to any attraction in the park. If it ceases to be available, they have not been robbed of anything they had a right to. They can't "take away" from you what you do not own, and this is comming from a fellow guest.

WRONG. They are robbed of the enjoyment of that attraction. They are robbed of being able share that enjoyment with their children. And I beg to differ, but every guest that enters that park owns a small part of it. It is the GUEST that pay for everything int hat park, it is the GUEST that decided if the park will survive another year or not. It may have Disney Co. on the deed, but the GUEST pay for that deed. No that does not give guest the right to be obnoxious and think the rules do not apply to them. But it DOES give the guest a say so in what they want to see in the parks.

This isn't about fair. Life is change, and it just isn't gonna ever be fair.

And Disney is escape from life.

But then again. Disney is not Disney anymore is it.

[hobie16]

But then again. Disney is not Disney anymore is it.

Please, please, please go outside and smell the flowers, watch the clouds go by, or feed some birds in the park.

[Honda Enoch]

Please, please, please go outside and smell the flowers, watch the clouds go by, or feed some birds in the park.

Why? I am not mad, I am not yelling. I am entitled to my opinion. Today's Disney is not the magical place it once was. Fun? Yes, there are fun things to do at Disney. But it's not the classic beloved magical park it was before.

[PatchOBlack]

Yes it is their CASTLES and the castles are the gate ways to Fantasyland

That is not what you said. You said that "it has always been Cinderella's Fantasyland at MK and Sleeping Beauty's Fantasyland at DL." Not that simply that their castles are there, and that they are used as the main entrance into Fantasyland, but that each Fantasyland belongs to the respective princess. You also said "IMO bringing in the other princess in the new FL is wrong. WDW belongs to Cinderella, DL belongs to Sleeping Beauty, if they want the others to have a place then the other parks should have castles for them.", furthering the idea that each Fantasyland is a showcase for that particular princess.

Your right. replacing original rides with new ones is the bests idea ever. Give them a few more years and EVERY original ride at Disney will be gone.

Once again, you jump to the conclusion that, because Disney has replaced or re-themed a few attractions, they MUST be intending to remove all the old attractions in short order. No, that isn't a logical conclusion. Perhaps, after several years, even a few decades, many of the original attractions will be replaced or greatly changed, but that is far from certain. Your sarcasm is not welcome as well.

Then you have not been looking at Disney over the past 20 years.

Not agreeing with your conclusions does not mean I have no idea what has been going on.

I am not insulting DL.

You seem to disparage it quite a bit, so it does seem you are insulting it.

And no Walt did not LOVE DL. He hated the lack of space, he hated the final outcome of the park.

We have already had some concrete evidence to the contrary. Yes, Walt did say mistakes were made at DL. That things could have been done better. However, that is not the same as saying that DL was, as a whole, a mistake, nor that said mistakes have not been corrected, at least in part.

And sorry to burst your bubble, but Walt planed to build a MK park in another location (ended up being Florida) from the day DL was opened.

Might we have an independent confirmation of this? Of course, even if it is true, it just means that Walt, being forward thinking, had decided that if DL worked out, that have two theme parks wasn't a bad idea.

Of course it's not I mean you can only fit the entire DL resort inside WDW's MK. Not small and cramped at all.

OWNED!!!

It isn't just a matter of how big or small a place is. It is a matter of how you use the space. I think DL makes good use of the area it has. Of course, one could look at WDW and say that it is too spread-out and sprawling. Since I have not been there, I will refrain from making such a judgment, of course.

Sure take away a classic and FORCE a person that likes it to fly across the country to go see it. And I would not say that's a good thing in the way of toad. toad at DL is not even half the size of the one that was at WDW.

While, yes, it would be nice if the parks could add new attractions without removing older ones, that is apparently not always an option. True, I am sure most folks would not want to travel all the way to the opposite side of the continent, just to experience a classic attraction that is no longer available to them at the closer park. But if it is choice between not having the attraction in any form, and having it at just one of the parks, I'll choose the latter.

EDIT: In regards to you not being mad and not yelling: While you are not typing in all caps (signifying yelling), the way you are phrasing things does suggest that you are upset. To be more specific, you are upset that WDW does not remain the same, and you feel that any changes made are a bad thing. Are you entitled to your opinion? Sure. However, when you make that opinion public, you also invite comment regarding said opinion, including how the opinion was presented, and if there is a valid basis for the given opinion.

[kurtisnelson]

Please do not feed the trolls. Hit the ignore button instead.

[CBeilby]

I already did.