Hong Kong Disneyland
Topic: Hong Kong Missing Attraction

#	Author	Message
11	X-san Sun 5/18/2008 4:29a	***I can't go into too many specifics but Frontierland was nixed very early in the process and not for budgetary reasons. It was felt that an American Wild West just wouldn't be a draw (and that was backed up by local surveys). On Toontown - you have to remember that there is virtually no exposure to the characters in that market - they had to build the education from scratch (and as a company should have done it sooner before the park opened) and so a land created by the 'toons just wouldn't have worked for them.*** Well, with all appropriate respect, and also in consideration to your further paragraphs, I just can't buy into this paragraph as an argument as to why two entire lands were cut and it DIDN'T come down to money. If that were the case, why not replace them with new ideas? Toontown I can understand. That was an "extra" at all the parks in the first place. But Frontierland is an absolute staple and very much a part of the whole Disneyland idea in the first place. Interestingly, when you eliminate that (or SOMETHING about olden days), you eliminate one of THREE of Walt Disney's original ideas of bringing you the worlds of yesterday, tomorrow, and fantasy. I always, until this point, couldn't really put a finger on what was SO very lacking about HKDL. Now I know. There's no yesterday there. (toontown, to me, is expendable...just a kiddie expansion of Fantasyland and I think that would've been HORRIBLE in Hong Kong anyway since already their Tomorrowland and Adventureland also seem like expansions of Fantasyland, which is actually my LEAST favorite land in all the magic kingdoms after toontown). Still and all, writing a paragraph about how two whole LANDS were cut out and trying to make it sound like it didn't come down to finances is pretty weak imo. I'm sure most Japanese didn't think about or care much about the American old west, but I don't see that Westernland is any less busy than any of the other TDL lands, nor do I feel that people miss out on the mass appeal of such offerings as thunder mountain, the steamboat, the canoes, Tom Sawyer Island, and so on...
12	X-san Sun 5/18/2008 4:32a	***DSP was mainly executed by individuals who weren't that artistically gifted - except for Chrissie Allen who did an amazing job on Studio 1 (and the even more phenomenal original concept).*** I'd say that's very telling. So many disappointed guests have said the same (empty, barren, etc...). Anywhere we could find online to take a look at that original Studio 1 artwork?
13	leemac Sun 5/18/2008 4:36a	<<There's no yesterday there.>> Main Street USA????
14	leemac Sun 5/18/2008 4:38a	<<If that were the case, why not replace them with new ideas?>> You could certainly argue that point - however whether you feel my point is "weak" or not is irrespective - it is the truth. A the stage of development that HKDLR was at that time the decision was not made out of budgetary concerns.
15	WorldDisney Sun 5/18/2008 4:45a	<<Well, with all appropriate respect, and also in consideration to your further paragraphs, I just can't buy into this paragraph as an argument as to why two entire lands were cut and it DIDN'T come down to money. If that were the case, why not replace them with new ideas?>> Yeah, I'm sorry I don't buy that either! If you are going to compeletly ELIMINATE two entire lands, not only making the size of your park smaller and even capacity, why not just find some other idea's? How hard could it be for the company that created Epcot and TDS? And it still doesn't explain why so many idea's in the other lands like LM, the rollercoaster and etc all got cut except for one reason, money!!
16	leemac Sun 5/18/2008 4:57a	I can totally understand where both of you are coming from but then neither of you know how a theme park is developed as you seem to think that everything that got cut from HKDL was due to budgetary constraints which simply isn't the case. I am not denying that some stuff got cut for that reason but neither of the two examples cited where for that reason. Every single park since DLP has had major cutbacks in development - DAK had huge chunks sliced from it over time. You learn to work with what you have. However at DAK the design team knew exactly where to use the money appropriately. Arguably it was one of the most rounded experiences on opening day of any of the parks that have opened since - personally I think it had a better attraction mix than TDS. It is the same with WDSP - I personally think they did a great job with the opening day menu - the attractions were fun - the problem was the environment was fatally dull.
17	davewasbaloo Sun 5/18/2008 5:13a	>>>It is the same with WDSP - I personally think they did a great job with the opening day menu - the attractions were fun - the problem was the environment was fatally dull. <<< Totally agree!
18	WorldDisney Sun 5/18/2008 5:21a	I'm not pretending to be an expert on this, but even me as a country theme park bumpkin could've told them (and did here many times) that making the park as tiny as it was was only going to hurt the park in the long run, will create a horrible word-of-mouth and that's obviously what it did. And now these people will probably spend billion plus in the end game just to get the park up to the standards it should've been there on opening day while now convincing a skeptical that the park is worth spending a full price ticket on. Again, I don't get it? Look, I'm sure you are right, but these people didn't learn anything with DCA? WDSP? That's what WE don't get??? All these half day parks fall in the same cycle over and over again and YEARS after they have opened, none of them have met their initial attendance quotes from the first year on and in the case in this park has actually fallen significantly from its first year on. If you honestly don't have the budget you want, then why don't they just wait until they do to build the park properly?? I bet NOW they wish they made this park they should have from day one.
19	X-san Sun 5/18/2008 5:29a	***I can totally understand where both of you are coming from but then neither of you know how a theme park is developed as you seem to think that everything that got cut from HKDL was due to budgetary constraints which simply isn't the case. I am not denying that some stuff got cut for that reason but neither of the two examples cited where for that reason.*** I won't presume for a second to equal your expertise as far as the intricacies of developing an amusement park are concerned, but I do know I can smell bullcrap from a mile away. I see it in all sorts of companies all the time, and I also see how they attempt to obfuscate the real truths. That's actually how *I* make my living. And you might or might not have a point about those two lands being non-budgetary issues, but even so I'd venture to guess they blew it in not moving forward on those two time tested concepts. Time and again, I've talked to Chinese people (well over one hundred at this point, I'd venture to guess), and their stories as well as stories about their friends and families all come down to two complaints. HKDL is tiny, and there is nothing to do. I'd bet my bottom dollar that two additional lands along with half a dozen or more attractions would've taken care of those hundreds of complaints right off the bat. To make the argument that ONE land is no good because it doesn't appeal (but it's not about money), and ANOTHER land wouldn't work since they aren't familiar enough with Disney (but it's not about money), and there WERE some cuts but it certainly wasn't all the fault of Disney, etc., etc...that's obfuscation. Or, in plain english, excuse making. If they'd come up with alternate concepts that just didn't work out, then such an argument would have a lot more validity. Since what they ultimately did was *nothing*, I just don't see the point. But hey, I don't know anything about creating an amusement park so obviously I don't "get it", and since HKDL was such an out of the gate success it seems Disney had the right idea all along.
20	WorldDisney Sun 5/18/2008 5:35a	And what I don't is, if its NOT about money, then why were so many OTHER attractions were cut? I mean, if you already wipe out two lands, then how come the money intially marked from those area's didn't go to the other attractions? Why did the LM have to get dropped if they now had all this extra money of not having a toontown or a FL? Why weren't those budgets simply earmarked for the other stuff they did have planned? Where did that money go??? Sorry, yeah, I just have a very hard time also believing that money didn't factor into it AT ALL when they didn't try in ANY way to replace what they have planned to do, especially when it lowers capacity. There must have a been shift somewhere that said to keep it small.

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

41-49

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Now Playing
Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah
Johnny Mercer And The Pied... / Small Fry - Capitol Sings Kids (Song of the South)

What's on
The Latest
Group RCI and Disney Vacation Club Members to Receive Benefit of New Multi-Year Relationship
NetDragon and Disney to Launch First MMORPG 'Disney Fantasy Online'
Disneyland Thanksgiving Day Parade pictures
New Disneyland Resort Video and Audio podcasts available
Video of dogs visiting Santa Paws at WDW's Downtown Disney
Tokyo Disneyland and Tokyo DisneySea Schedule for Fiscal Year 2009
TCM Presents: The Family Classics With All-New Original Special and Nostalgic Holiday Festival
Kids go free to Disney on Broadway
Innoventions Dream Home featured on MSN.com
Disney Store Responds to Inaccurate Information in Widely Circulating Email

Click here for The Latest