DCA version 2.0 - Will It Be Enough?
 

There's no doubt in anybody's mind that Disney('s) California Adventure will be a better theme park by the middle of June. I'm really looking forward to the beautiful changes and additions.

But is that going to be enough:confused:

Remember - one of the main complaints about California Adventure was the abject stupidity and frankly cynical ploy of situating a California-themed park in, um, California.

That defect is going to remain. While the theme has been a tad diluted (it was never very strong to begin with), it is hardly gone - and, in fact, has been accentuated by the park's major change - the 1st entire re-do of a Disney theme park entrance - Buena Vista Street.



And while DCA has taken major strides in added attractions and especially in the Pixarification of the Park (being directly across and merely 100 steps from Disneyland, it should by all rights be called Pixarland), many of the negatives about DCA remain. It's still got an odd layout of overly wide and shadeless, characterless, sprawling avenues and a generic feeling to its theme of sorta California-ish.

BUT it is going to be so much prettier than it was in 2001. And it will have a decent number of fun attractions. And, of course, it's got lots of super popular PIXAR.

For a while in fact, it will be hard to see beyond the splendor of Cars Land, Cars Land, Cars Land!!! (Al's review, now that previews have let the cat out of the bag, or the car out of the garage as the case may be.). But once you look past all the fabulous changes ... take an objective look at DCA version 2.0 as a whole and not just as very much improved.



:cheers: California Adventure WILL be better. But it will still be the California park in California. Will the changes be enough to finally make DCA a successful Disney theme park ... or is it sadly no more than lipstick on a pig?

The world is grey.

Some will love it, some will hate it, most will enjoy it for a few hours and not give it much thought past that.

Yeah, but there is an objective view of it too in terms of attendance and revenue.

I think it's going to be a success. Yes, many shortcomings remain, however Walt knew as well as anyone that good show can make up for many shortcomings. While the stupid theme concept makes success more difficult and is something to overcome, it was never the real root of the problem. The real root of the problem has always been execution and quality. And this redo is shaping up to deliver that in spades. As long as they have really followed through and created an environment that FEELS like a quality Disney experience, then any quibbles about overall theme or re-cycled technology become moot.

However, I am concerned about the wisdom of making the centerpiece of the transformation a strip of black asphalt with no trees and short buildings. Because DCA totally needed MORE ways to walk around in blazing sun.

Why is a theme park based on California being in California a problem? Because locals who live in California are board with it because they live here? Because visiters to California can step outside of the park and see the real California?

I was born and raised in California, as was my mom. I studied the history of California because it is so interesting. It's a very unusual place. I love California, so I enjoyed DCA, but not as much as I would have had it not been done on the cheep.

When I first visited Hollywood as an adult in the 80's, I was shocked. It was not what I had in mind. Then I went to USH, and found it a lot more fun (Hollywood is in a lot better shape now, BYW). So, is there really that much wrong with people visiting the state and seeing a stylized or fantasy version as well? Would I go to Paris and visit a theme park based on France? I could see it. Disney Sea is by the sea. Aulani is a Hawaiian resort based on Hawaii (ok, it's not a theme park, but it is a Disney property in Hawaii based on Hawaii).

The fact that Walt had a connection to LA & Hollywood is a reasonable usage of the idea. And my complaint from 2001 was that DCA, unlike other Disney parks, did not transport you to another time and place. At least now it's another time. And the lack of the Disney touch (Like disney characters) sorely lacking when it opened has also been adressed, as well as more things for smaller kids to do.

One measure of "if it is enough" (besides ticket sales, which will be skewed by curiosity about Carsland for the first year or two) will be the lack of complaints. In my opinion, yes I think they will be down to the level that Disneyland gets (I'll call that the standard, or norm), therefore "enough" to be considered successful. And I think it will stand up to the same hours and admission costs as DL, thus stand on it's own.

The other measure will be "can it stand the test of time". Will it still be here in 10 or 20 years? Or will it be razed to be replaced by a whole new idea? That I cannot say for sure, but I bet the Disney company is expecting to amortize the $1.1 billion over at least that long withought starting over again.

That's not really a fair analogy. "Hollywood" isn't Hollywood, "Hollywood" IS Universal Studios (or the studios in Burbank, or Vasquez Rocks, or countless other areas around SoCal that are not in the 90028 zip code). The actual city of Hollywood at it's BEST is a symbolic tourist trap. By visiting Universal you visited a legitimate, authentic experience of Hollywood not replicable anywhere else in the world (yes, the theme park is replicated, and surpassed, in Florida, but they will NEVER have the true Hollywood history that's up on that hill).

No one visits the Golden Gate Bridge then shows up at DCA and says, "Geez, why did I waste my time THERE?!"

By visiting Hollywood Pictures Backlot you are visiting a pale imitation of something real and historical that's accessible with little to no extra effort. By visiting Redwood Creek you are visiting an underwhelming imitation of spectacular nature that's entirely accessible with little to no extra effort.

No, it's not impossible to achieve a Disney-worthy feat of fantasy and "transport you to another time and place" within the confines of the California-in-California theme. But by inviting comparison to truly wonderful REAL places that are practically visible by peeking your head over the lack-of-berm, Disney started with one foot in a crater. To pull that off, the result has to be at least as amazing, if not more amazing, than the real deal. Even at Disney's best that's a tall order. And where DCA has succeeded (ToT, World of Color, Little Mermaid....um....) it's with stuff that has gotten away from that theme, avoiding the uphill battle against expectations.

California IS a wondrous place. Yet I felt mildly amused and mildly insulted by the theme of DCA. Perhaps it was the general poor quality of the park, but it seemed less a tribute to than a mockery of California to me. I confess I feel more kindly to it now that a sense of time shift is strongly set by the Buena Vista Street entrance.

There's an element of the New DCA that I quite like which won't be finished this month. When it eventually is, by the 50's-ification of the Golden State area, I wonder if many guests will even notice it. I really like that each "land" will be a different decade in time. It's a great idea, but I think it's going to be a subtlety beyond the perception of the vast majority of guests.



But at least the park will try to establish a sense of a Time I cannot otherwise visit, rather than just a Place I would enjoy far greater if I drove a few hours in any direction.

It's a start. ;)

I never had a problem with the theme and was generally fine with the look of the park from the beginning (except the back part of PP and the Hollywood & Vine corner of backlot).

Yes, the rides generally sucked, but that is of limited import to me since on 80% of my visits to Disney parks I don't go on any rides or only go on rides because companions want to (Yes, Pirates of the Caribbean is a vastly superior ride to Winnie the Pooh but after five rides each I find them equally boring). It is the company that makes the park, not the parks. At least for me.

I'm happy with the visual upgrades but the content of Carsland is of little appeal to me.

So I imagine my opinion of DCA will be little changed.

That's very true GD, but do visiters realize that? I have heard dissapointment from visiters from out of state or out of the country. But you are right, that was a bad analogy. The Hollywood that people know is what they see on their screens, which comes from the studios, not the city it's self. That's not to say there aren't parts of the city that are important landmarks, but those are little more than tourist attractions now. And seeing replicas of landmarks like the Golden Gate is never a replacement for seeing the real thing. I don't think anyone expected it to be. It's the ambiance or character of the place that people can enjoy. For instance, now you will be able to enjoy feeling what it would be like to go back to Los Angeles in the 1920's.

And I agree, ISM, that the annoying puns and cartoonish look of parts of the park made a mochery of the state. I'm glad it's being removed for the most part.

The point is, will it be enough? I think if they hadn't fixed it's flaws, the park would have been closed as a seperate gate, or razed completly with in 5 years. Now it has a chance, and I feel it will continue to improve, to stay as a stand alone park. Will the California theme stay? Only time will tell.

In my opinion, the most similar thing to DCA Disney has previously done is the World Showcase at Epcot. Those are theme versions of a dozen or so countries. The subtle fact that it's as those countries generally were about 50 years ago (while cultures were still quite separate and distinct) is lost on nearly all visitors, I think. But, to me, it works because you can't really go to all those places - perhaps even in an average lifetime. You may visit Paris or London, but never Norway and Mexico and Italy and China in one afternoon.

Furthermore, the closest country to Florida, Mexico, is still several hours away - and the rest need a plane ride and a passport to experience in real life. So the World Showcase is, to me, a perfectly acceptable (not to mention enjoyable) fantasy environment - even though it's based on real places.


California just doesn't do it for me. Part of it is it bugs me that the real deals are but a few hours drive away, and thus the facsimiles seem cynical. But mostly it's because, since I live in California, the theme seems completely meh to me. And at least half of the Resort's guests also live in California.


But I'm with Alex in that the rides and attractions are not what makes Disneyland enjoyable for me. It's the Park itself. I dig the themes and the beautiful execution of those themes. If DCA is now going to be reasonably beautiful and themically impressive, perhaps it won't matter if I'm less entralled with the theme, but wowed by the execution in fantastic Disney style.


But it would indeed be the first Disney park I enjoyed where the theme meant nothing to me. And to the extent DCA has attempted to downplay the California theme, it's made it even more generic a park. That's always been my main complaint - it seemed like a generic theme park and not a Disney one. Here's hoping it seems much more Disney (or Disney presents Pixar) come June 15th. :snap:

At $38*, DCA is a pretty good deal.



*$38 is the difference between a 1-Day 1-Park Ticket and a 1-Day Park Hopper Ticket - does anybody buy a 1-Day 1-Park Ticket for DCA?

In case anyone missed it

I never can visit the real Golden Gate bridge anymore, without expecting to be blasted with the smell of burnt coffee.

I wonder if the Hyperion Bridge will be graced with the aroma of burnt Starbucks? :)

That would be an upgrade from the smell of urine at the real Hyperion bridge.

Try spending an average of $1800.00+ and flying for minimum 9 hours to get to your "local" Disney Park.

*Sigh* familiarity breeds contempt. I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

I wish Tokyo Disney Seas was that close. ;)

DCA has definitely grown on me; especially with the nighttime fun stuff- I just hope they'll grow up to have the same hours as Disneyland.

One of the things I loathe about DCA, and it's not really changing, is there's little feeling of exploration because you are basically on a track when you're in DCA.

The main route for guests is along the aptly-named Parade Corridor - and this wide, basically straight-line track is how you experience the bulk of the park, either backward or forward in 2 dimensions, unless and until you branch off to some of the other straight-line tracks available.

You experience Condor Flats by moving through it on a wide track, one direction or another, nowhere else to go. Paradise Pier? On a circular track, one way or the other, nowhere else to go.

Some lands are actually just streets - - the Studio, Cars Land in fact - that make no pretense about your journey being limited to a linear direction.

I think it's only the Grizzly River/Redwood Creek area that breaks this very boring mold. It's still pretty much one direction or the other, but there are some side paths and places, and the track here is noticeably curvy and winding and thinner.


What seems great about the new stuff is they look to be AREAS in more than two dimensions. Buena Vista Street is like a beautiful town square and a hub with spokes heading out in different directions (albeit straight line directions.)


I'm not sure yet about Cars Land. It IS a road, with one intersection. But something about the V8 Cafe and Cozy Cone Motel, even though they are food locations, gives me hope there might be some explorability to Cars Land.


DCA will remain largely linear though ... and I think this adds to its vague boringness. Will the few examples of lands in 3 dimensions be enough to tip the balance to a vibrant theme park?

Main Street, Adventureland, Critter Country, and Tomorrowland are essentially just linear streets.

Fantasyland and Frontierland are essentially a T-intersections.

It seems to me that New Orleans Square is the only land that has any real complexity in terms of layout and it only has two attractions laid out so as to avoid any of the the non-linear possibilities.

You know, now that you mention it that is very true. from any given place in Disneyland you can't see much of the park. While it makes it easier to get lost, it also allows for the adventurous exploration you mention. But from anywhere past Blue Sky celler, you can see virtually all that side of the park.

Well if you just moved your island you could have contempt too.

To the Northern Hemisphere? Then we could be The Island At The Top Of The World.

On reading the article, my observation regarding a certain long-beloved attraction that seems to be not so beloved on its return is: Be careful what you wish for, because you might just get it.

I feel sorry for the Imagineers who listened to the public waxing lyrical about how special the flying saucers were and how they wanted them back, only to have to listen to people whinging about its many downfalls now that its back.

Alex is right in pointing out there's plenty of linear paths in Disneyland, but I rarely feel I have only back-and-forth as a travel option in that Park. To the contrary, I think Disneyland is successful because its layouts allow for many different paths of travel - and, as a land, only Adventureland is a linear track.


In other and pleasing DCA news, apparently screws have been turned and GM has backed down .... CMs may now say the words "Cadillac Range" when referring to the mountain range evoking luxury automobiles of yesteryear!

I'm glad that legal battle didn't Escalade.

Fans of the Pixar films might have staged a Coup de Ville.

I agree with Alex - DL is almost entirely linear paths. When we were in DL Paris we discovered the joys and annoyances of non-linear pathways.

All DCA judgement reserved until later.

Au contraire, imo, but when I'm in Fantasyland, I feel I can go in quite a few directions. When I'm in Tomorrowland, I likewise feel I can move in more than one direction. Frontierland the same. Even Critter Country is more of a big space than a linear road.

Sure, not so the road to get there. And yeah, there's a main thoroughfare thru Fantasyland, and the entry to Tomorrowland is a linear path for a ways. That's simply not the same as an entire park consisting of linear ... and I'm glad to see DCA moving away from that with each new addition. (Bugs Land is an area, for example).


I'll heartily agree that Disneyland Paris took this a step or five further. But it's part of the genius of the general Disneyland layout that I find sorely lacking in DCA.


Don't get me wrong though ... I think I'm with the Disney Co. on this one, and this may just be a tipping point. DCA might finally be a really fun place to spend several hours ... and not just when you're drunk! :D

I can't argue with how you feel in Disneyland but I don't experience DCA as any more linear than it.

Tomorrowland not only is a single pathway, it is an overcrowded single pathway. I'm not sure how Critter Country is any less of a linear path than Condor Flats.

That said, I think DCA tends to define itself into smaller units. "Golden State" is by no means a linear path "land" but if you think of it instead as Condor Flats, San Francisco, Pacific Wharf, and Redwood Creek then it is collection of simpler things.

But then so is Fantasyland if it were instead "Castle Flats" "Matterhorn Wharf" and "Small World Causeway.

And unlike Disneyland, assuming that the path between Bug's Land and Tower of Terror is remaining, DCA no longer has any significant pathways that are dead ends.

But again, no real biggie to me. If all of my friends are in the Paris studio park, then by definition that is the best Disney park in the world.

My last day in the park was spent entirely at DCA and I didnt even ride anything. I think it's already made great improvements as a place one an hang out in.

That was our recent evening as well. The vibe near Buena Vista Street is pure awesome. Quite the change it needed from the old Sunshine Plaza. For once, I actually don't miss the old parking lot. :)

I for one will miss the hubcap, I always liked it. But that is the ONLY thing I'll miss from Sunshine Plaza (where you could travel in any direction BUT straight..what a fvcking train wreck that was), and am thus far happy with what I've seen of the replacement.

I more or less agree with iSm that, for whatever reason, DCA has always felt more...thoroughfare-like. Though I suspect it has less to do with the specifics of the topology and more to do with how much of the surrounds actually catches one's interest and motivates one to switch from "get from point-A to point-B" mode to "Meander and enjoy the sites" mode.

Well, Alex is quite right about the Dead-Ends. I hate that about Disneyland, and DCA wins in that department. I think dead ends are a layout fail. (I would have long ago continued the path from critter country big thunder around the long way, and from the autopia to small world, again the long way.)


But, yeah, I see DCA as a much bigger hang-out place now. I remember, though, long ago, when we liked a bunch of the entertainment (Blast! in the Hyperion Theater, and the original Eureka parade), we would spend most summer days primarily in DCA!!


(And the AP Lounge being adjacent didn't hurt either.) ;)

I hated the hubcap, and the reflectors- I was temporarily blinded by one of them that had broken and was aimed improperly. It was not cool going to first aid, and essentially being laughed at because I couldn't see.

You forgot those fab summer concerts they did one year. I went to see the Village People! :)

Hahaha, we were at Village People, too. I think that was my favorite one! What a blast!

The Bangles with Brad - say, where is that boy?

As much as I don't want to help perpetuate iSm's curmudgeonliness, I have to agree with the corridors effect: there are far more long pathways to "get somewhere."

And of course, I for one will never forgive the lack of berms. At least the Cadilac Range made it so you can't see the Anahiem convention center from inside the park. And the tree growth is helping. Again, at least it's improving, but not totally fixed.

Well, I broke down and bought myself a ticket for tomorrow night's AP preview event. Thought I was going to hold out until the 15th, but, the other night when I was in DCA, a castmember preview was taking place. I got a gander at Cars Land through the open doors at Pacific Wharf, aka the place near the free chocolate, and holy cow! It was like the scene in Wizard of Oz when Dorothy opens her front door after landing in Munchkinland. Sure, I've seen the big rock archway over the construction wall for what seems like years now, but, ground level, with nighttime lighting, just amazing. I'm still not happy about the cost, coming so quickly on the heels of the outrageous AP hike, and the faux connection between the preview event money and Disney's CHOC donation, but, I'm weak and easily swayed. Ooh, pretty colors through a doorway!

In answer to the OP, yes. I think what they've done, and will continue to do, brings DCA up to the level of a worthy second gate. Red car trolleys, atmosphere performers, musicians, these are the things that will transport me from Anaheim 2012, to Buena Vista Street, circa 193040something. To quote Liz Lemon, I want to go to there.

They certainly weenied it well, didn't they?

That's what she said.

Corrected for you

Gn2 - enjoy! :) We had a brief glance at the red car the other day, along with a peek at storefronts through those teasing doors. I haven't had such a big grin on my face at the resort since 2005.

I didn't read Al's latest post with all the spoilers in it, but I did read the prior one about parking nightmares....and I just might hook up the trailer and bike there on the 15th.

This is Curmudgeon Steve, signing off. :p



:snap:

Ok, maybe I'm still a little buzzed from it all, but I'm joining the bandwagon and declaring DCA a ... oh, can I even type the words? ... a successful Disney theme park. OMG!!


:cheers:

By now, we all know Buena Vista Street and Cars Land are beautiful. I'm so glad that I first experienced BV Street at twilight, when it was gloriously magical, and Cars Land at Route 66 Neon Cadillac Range Nightmosphere, when it was spectacularly gorgeous.

Racers is - d'uh - a really fun E-Ticket, dark ride / turbulent & thrilling hybrid (but so smooth that it's never turbulent). To my surprise and delight, Junkyard Jamboree is lots of highly-amusing fun in a minor key, and Luigi's Tires is easy as pie to "operate" and a total blast of silly fun (if you can get there early enough to avoid the long line). Nighttime visit followed by Early Entry morning was perfect, btw.


But more than just adding a couple of beautiful new areas, DCA has finally done a lot to combat the somewhat off-putting "track" layout I've been kvetching about in this thread.

The side streets of Cars Land link it to other parts of the park such that there's practically an entire south side back street zone parallel to the main track (parade route) and, with the Condor Flats, Grizzly River loop on the north side - there's now several ways to cross the park and many joins and loops to provide for lots of ways to switch directions and switch things up in moving around DCA.

The only single-direction track loop left is the one around Paradise Pier. That could have been fixed by extending the Cars Land west entrance all the way to California Screamin' ... but I'm glad they didn't do that. The west entrance to Cars Land is best kept away from such a major thoroughfare, and it's pretty perfect as a sleepy side entry from the Cannery Row food court. This entrance is so beautiful and evocative - underneath the rock archway at the feet of the towering Cadillac Range. Just wonderful.

The other side entrance, on the east side of Cars Land, goes to the very back of Bugs Land - - insanely making Cars Land just a few steps away from Tower of Terror. It's like a magic teleportation pathway. Seriously, this new "back route" of DCA completely changes and majorly fixes the one-track-mind of the existing layout. Wow.


Eh, the Bugs Land entrances from ToT and from Cars Land could be a little more elaborate. They are very plain wrap, and that's too bad - since the kiddie land's "main entrance" is so fantastic ... and I suspect the "through road" around back to become the most popular route to and from Bugs Land.

A minor quibble. Of course, while barely seeing any of the "old" DCA, I'm still confident to say the place has been successfully revised! The finishing touches to make each "land" a different decade are still to come, I understand. But DCA is ... omg, I shudder to say it, a fun and beautiful place to visit.


:iSm:

Who are you, and what have you done to Steve?

:)

It's a sock puppet trying to stir up kindness!

;)

Gabba Gabba ;)

I agree on all fronts except the route from CarsLand to BugsLand. Yes, it could def be more elaborate, but there are some fun tricks there. I love how the trees get larger as you go with bigger leaves, and the fence, which is a regular fence at its base but as your eye is drawn up and up they become massive popsicle sticks. With your view then pointed upward you see the canopy of BugsLand before walking in. I think it's masterfully done.

But yeah. DCA is no longer a curse word.

I'll have to take a better look at it then (and travel from Cars Land to Bugs Land instead of vis-versa, which was our only path so far). I saw the fence was supposed to be something ... but didn't get Popsicle Sticks. D'uh! I like it better already!

The transition to Bugs Land plays better in the daytime than at night, so says me.

I hate you all.

Now that "Carsland" is a run away hit, and as far as I can tell made zero attempt to fit into the California theme can we think about changing the name of the park to something cooler?

Disney Adventure!
Disney Rush!
Disney Stuff that don't suck?

Like Bugs Land fit? If anything, Cars Land is a better fit to the theme than Bugs Land. Radiator Springs may not have been in California, but Route 69 is, and the car culture that Cars embodies certainly has its ties to California.

Not that I'm arguing against dropping the theme, but just saying there's an angle there for the defenders.

Au contraire. Cars Land is much more a perfect fit to California than any other Pixar addition to the park.

Bugs Land? Um, yeah, we have insects in California. But they are, lemme see now, yes, everywhere else in the world as well.

Monsters, Inc.? I don't recall anything about Monstropolis being the 3rd largest city in California - or, ahem, ANY city in California.


So ... Radiator Springs makes quite a big deal about it being located along Route 66 - which is quite a connection to California folklore. You're simply incorrect there, Moonie ... Cars Land is the most specifically California thing ever added via Pixar to DCA. Sorry. :p




Edited to inquire: Was it ever said in the film that Radiator Springs was not in the California section of Route 66? I mean, we might assume from the beautiful topography that it's in Arizona, but is it ever outright stated?

Did I really type Route 69?

Dr. Freud says you did. ;)

I don't remember anything in Bugs Life that said where it was, so since there are bugs in California.....

Cars on the other hand, I believe showed a US road map at one point that makes it clear Radiator Springs is not in California.

Plus "Disney California Adventure" is a stupid name anyway.

Which is why that name has never been uttered by anyone ever.


It's "DCA." ;)

Disney Carsland Adventure!

We all have our favorite "routes" to get our kicks...

I'm a big fan of Lombard street myself.

At this point, calling the park "Disney California Adventure" is like calling the park across the way "Disney Middle America Dreams". The theme applies to the entrance land and treats the rest of the park as a spinoff thereof.