I took my kids to see The Muppets last Friday night. I wasn't planning to go; the idea of seeing the Muppets wasn't on the top of my wishlist. I don't think of Muppets and think "Christmas must-see".
But I read the blog entry at FutureProbe, where it was given a fairly enthusiastic thumbs-up, and my kids really were pretty excited about seeing it, so we picked that one over Arthur, Hugo and Puss In Boots>.
I'm glad we saw it. It was a lot of fun. Jokes aimed high and low; I found myself laughing at stuff and my kids would look at me like, "what was funny about that?" Several times. On the other hand, they laughed hard at a few things that, well, that just brought a smile to my face, as much for their reaction as to the onscreen joke. (Don't ask me what these were. I don't remember anymore.)
It isn't high concept stuff. It was just a fun little story about trying to save the Muppets Studio from a bad guy. Reminded me a little of The Blues Brothers with the whole "we're getting the band back together", needing to raise money quick through the use of a "show". I wonder if it has anything to do with Frank Oz's involvement in the original Muppets show and with the Blues Brothers movie?
I don't put this up there with the stuff we get from Pixar routinely, or even most of the stuff we've gotten from Disney Animation, but it was a good, fun movie, and I certainly didn't feel like I wasted our money on it! (In other words, it was worth seeing in the theater.)
*****
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Blog highlight from 2011...
...for me, at least.
You like to know if someone is reading your entries as a blog writer, at least I do. So comments are always appreciated. When I don't get any comments, I confess I get sort of disillusioned with blogging. Or maybe "disinterested" is a better word.
So for me, the highlight of my blogging for this year came in January! In this post, titled Why Story Is King, I wrote about my new (at the time) purchase of Steve Alcorn's book titled Theme Park Design, specifically a chapter about the use of story in theme parks. And lo and behold, who should comment but Steve Alcorn!
I have to say, it made me feel really good to hear from the author, to know that he read what I wrote, and he even had a little bit of input. It's the kind of thing that keeps me interested. That keeps me writing this blog and not giving up on it.
That, for me, was the highlight of 2011, at least with respect to this blog. (Plenty of other higher-lights in other areas...) Good thing it came early in the year. Who knows what I would have done if it hadn't come? :-)
*****
You like to know if someone is reading your entries as a blog writer, at least I do. So comments are always appreciated. When I don't get any comments, I confess I get sort of disillusioned with blogging. Or maybe "disinterested" is a better word.
So for me, the highlight of my blogging for this year came in January! In this post, titled Why Story Is King, I wrote about my new (at the time) purchase of Steve Alcorn's book titled Theme Park Design, specifically a chapter about the use of story in theme parks. And lo and behold, who should comment but Steve Alcorn!
I have to say, it made me feel really good to hear from the author, to know that he read what I wrote, and he even had a little bit of input. It's the kind of thing that keeps me interested. That keeps me writing this blog and not giving up on it.
That, for me, was the highlight of 2011, at least with respect to this blog. (Plenty of other higher-lights in other areas...) Good thing it came early in the year. Who knows what I would have done if it hadn't come? :-)
*****
Friday, November 11, 2011
Disney Vacation: How Long?
A while back I read a post discussing the number of parks, or perhaps the call for a fifth gate, at WDW. It may have been at FutureProbe, or somewhere else. (But I think it was at FutureProbe.) The point was that Disney expanded with the idea of getting visitors to extend their stays from one week to maybe 10 days or two weeks, spending money at the resorts, at the parks, at Disney stores and at Disney restaurants.
If it had worked it would have put a lot of extra money in the Disney coffers. But it didn't. People didn't extend their stays. They just spent less days at a particular park in favor of another park.
But I wonder.
Does this "length of stay" statistic (which I've personally never seen but which I believe is out there somewhere) tell the whole story? I mean, the truth of it is that Americans don't vacation that way. Ten days is probably the longest we go for. Two weeks, maybe, if it's somewhere extraordinary. Perhaps Hawaii or Europe, or an African safari or whatever. But not for a domestic vacation. Probably not to Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean either. Ten days is probably the max. More likely most are going to be 7 or 8 nights.
I don't know what the average is for weeks of paid vacation in the United States. I'd guess it's probably around 2 weeks. Maybe 3 weeks. Not too many of us get 5 or 6 weeks off paid each year. So, figure one of those weeks gets spent at Disney for your average Disney-phile. The question becomes then, where are they going to spend the other week? Maybe a resort on a lake. Maybe at a relative's home in Phoenix, or in the Ozarks Mountains in Missouri.
Any way to get them to spend their second week at Disney?
Well, maybe not, if there isn't much "new" to see. You've already gone on Space Mountain, Pirates, Test Track, Everest, Rock'n'Roller Coaster, Tower of Terror, Haunted Mansion, it's a small world, and Splash Mountain. Multiple times. You even got on Soarin' twice and Toy Story Mania once. So what's to go back for? If it's thrill rides you like, you can go a lot closer to home and not have to pay for lodging and air fare or travel expenses.
Maybe you suggest that people should come back just to "experience the magic". Sit in the parks, take in the ambiance. To this I say, wishful thinking. When you've only got a week or two weeks, many families will choose to do as much as they can during that time frame. Sit on a bench? Fight crowds again? There's no "magic" in the mosh pits that are also known as Disney's park concourses.
To me, the way to make people spend more of their yearly allotment of vacation time at a Disney park would be to make it a better experience. Don't keep raising fees in order to raise revenue. Don't make that steak dinner at Le Cellier two dollars more and/or give the diner less food for the price. Don't give me less services at a hotel but charge me more. Don't give me a less comfortable experience at a park, whether it be more crowds or longer wait times, and charge me more for it. Those are not the ways to win the hearts of potential Disney-philes.
Give me more for my money. Give me a dinner that rivals the best restaurants in the country. Give me more and better attractions. Make my stay at your resorts even more comfortable, more enjoyable. That's how you are going to get me to spend even more time at Disney in a given year.
To me, worrying about whether a guest stays at a resort for 7 or 8 nights, or ten or twelve nights per stay is worrying about the wrong question. The right question is "how can we get our customers to spend even more time on our property in the course of a year?" There is plenty to do in Orlando. Right now, we don't even have to patronize Disney parks or restaurants even if we stay on Disney property. Give us a reason to stay on property. Give us new experiences and enhanced old experiences.
*****
If it had worked it would have put a lot of extra money in the Disney coffers. But it didn't. People didn't extend their stays. They just spent less days at a particular park in favor of another park.
But I wonder.
Does this "length of stay" statistic (which I've personally never seen but which I believe is out there somewhere) tell the whole story? I mean, the truth of it is that Americans don't vacation that way. Ten days is probably the longest we go for. Two weeks, maybe, if it's somewhere extraordinary. Perhaps Hawaii or Europe, or an African safari or whatever. But not for a domestic vacation. Probably not to Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean either. Ten days is probably the max. More likely most are going to be 7 or 8 nights.
I don't know what the average is for weeks of paid vacation in the United States. I'd guess it's probably around 2 weeks. Maybe 3 weeks. Not too many of us get 5 or 6 weeks off paid each year. So, figure one of those weeks gets spent at Disney for your average Disney-phile. The question becomes then, where are they going to spend the other week? Maybe a resort on a lake. Maybe at a relative's home in Phoenix, or in the Ozarks Mountains in Missouri.
Any way to get them to spend their second week at Disney?
Well, maybe not, if there isn't much "new" to see. You've already gone on Space Mountain, Pirates, Test Track, Everest, Rock'n'Roller Coaster, Tower of Terror, Haunted Mansion, it's a small world, and Splash Mountain. Multiple times. You even got on Soarin' twice and Toy Story Mania once. So what's to go back for? If it's thrill rides you like, you can go a lot closer to home and not have to pay for lodging and air fare or travel expenses.
Maybe you suggest that people should come back just to "experience the magic". Sit in the parks, take in the ambiance. To this I say, wishful thinking. When you've only got a week or two weeks, many families will choose to do as much as they can during that time frame. Sit on a bench? Fight crowds again? There's no "magic" in the mosh pits that are also known as Disney's park concourses.
To me, the way to make people spend more of their yearly allotment of vacation time at a Disney park would be to make it a better experience. Don't keep raising fees in order to raise revenue. Don't make that steak dinner at Le Cellier two dollars more and/or give the diner less food for the price. Don't give me less services at a hotel but charge me more. Don't give me a less comfortable experience at a park, whether it be more crowds or longer wait times, and charge me more for it. Those are not the ways to win the hearts of potential Disney-philes.
Give me more for my money. Give me a dinner that rivals the best restaurants in the country. Give me more and better attractions. Make my stay at your resorts even more comfortable, more enjoyable. That's how you are going to get me to spend even more time at Disney in a given year.
To me, worrying about whether a guest stays at a resort for 7 or 8 nights, or ten or twelve nights per stay is worrying about the wrong question. The right question is "how can we get our customers to spend even more time on our property in the course of a year?" There is plenty to do in Orlando. Right now, we don't even have to patronize Disney parks or restaurants even if we stay on Disney property. Give us a reason to stay on property. Give us new experiences and enhanced old experiences.
*****
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Happy 3rd Birthday to DFR!
Hey, I missed it again. Seems like a yearly thing.
I've been writing this blog for 3 years and one month now. I started it on October 9, 2008, and here it is, November 9, 2011.
Lately I've fallen into a period where I don't have much Disney stuff to write about. But I'm not abandoning the blog - just waiting for Disney topics to force themselves into my conscience again. They will.
Meantime, I've been mostly interested in self-publishing. I love to write, and I've even finished a few projects - one short-ish mystery novel, several short stories and a couple longer pieces in the 10-25K range. I have about four or five other stories on the burner, started, at various lengths, and I keep working on them. Some day I hope to put up links here and other places to a place where one can purchase my fiction, at least in electronic format.
But I've been reading a lot of author blogs, mostly of the independent and self-publishing variety, which provide encouragement and advice. And writing. Just not writing this (or my Chitown Sports Ramblings) blog...
*****
I've been writing this blog for 3 years and one month now. I started it on October 9, 2008, and here it is, November 9, 2011.
Lately I've fallen into a period where I don't have much Disney stuff to write about. But I'm not abandoning the blog - just waiting for Disney topics to force themselves into my conscience again. They will.
Meantime, I've been mostly interested in self-publishing. I love to write, and I've even finished a few projects - one short-ish mystery novel, several short stories and a couple longer pieces in the 10-25K range. I have about four or five other stories on the burner, started, at various lengths, and I keep working on them. Some day I hope to put up links here and other places to a place where one can purchase my fiction, at least in electronic format.
But I've been reading a lot of author blogs, mostly of the independent and self-publishing variety, which provide encouragement and advice. And writing. Just not writing this (or my Chitown Sports Ramblings) blog...
*****
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Samland's book...
I said before that I would post the links to purchase Sam Gennawey's book, Walt and the Promise of Progress City, but I haven't. So here they are now...
The paperback version...
The Kindle version...
Go get it!!!
*****
The paperback version...
The Kindle version...
Go get it!!!
*****
Monday, October 31, 2011
Time and Effort
I was reading a couple of other blog entries this morning on the Disney blogs that are regular stops for me, and one of them, on The World According To Jack, talked about how he goes about doing a blog entry. I have to admit that I was amazed. It's more like journalism than what I think of as "blogging". He goes into some level of detail about the cameras he uses for his original photography, lenses, video cameras, photo editing software, and word processing software.
Another blog I read, Futureprobe, often makes an offhand comment in the course of the blog about upcoming entries that he is preparing, leading me to believe that the author of that blog puts a lot of time and research into his entries. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Disney bloggers write with this level of dedication.
But it isn't my style here. As my readers (being optimistic here on using the plural) can probably tell, most of my entries are the result of some thought or idea flinging itself into my face and into my consciousness, and if I have an opinion or another take on the idea or whatever, I bang out a blog entry in about 15 or 20 minutes. Sometimes longer if I have to get to a patient. But my total time writing it (first draft is what gets posted, usually) probably averages around that range. For example, it came to me as I was watching the news coverage of Steve Jobs' demise that he was more like Walt Disney than he was like the personages that the news commentators were comparing him to (Albert Einstein? Really?). So I thought about the comparison a bit, and came in to work the next morning, and banged out that blog entry between patients. Probably 10 minutes to write it.
I'm going on about 10 minutes for this one. What do you think? :-)
*****
Another blog I read, Futureprobe, often makes an offhand comment in the course of the blog about upcoming entries that he is preparing, leading me to believe that the author of that blog puts a lot of time and research into his entries. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Disney bloggers write with this level of dedication.
But it isn't my style here. As my readers (being optimistic here on using the plural) can probably tell, most of my entries are the result of some thought or idea flinging itself into my face and into my consciousness, and if I have an opinion or another take on the idea or whatever, I bang out a blog entry in about 15 or 20 minutes. Sometimes longer if I have to get to a patient. But my total time writing it (first draft is what gets posted, usually) probably averages around that range. For example, it came to me as I was watching the news coverage of Steve Jobs' demise that he was more like Walt Disney than he was like the personages that the news commentators were comparing him to (Albert Einstein? Really?). So I thought about the comparison a bit, and came in to work the next morning, and banged out that blog entry between patients. Probably 10 minutes to write it.
I'm going on about 10 minutes for this one. What do you think? :-)
*****
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Steve Jobs: The Walt Disney of Technology
As everyone probably knows, Steve Jobs passed away yesterday, October 5th, 2011, at the age of 56. He's been battling cancer for at least 10 years, and though I haven't seen anything yet about the exact cause of his death (not because it isn't out there, I just haven't had time to look that much), I'd assume it was cancer-related.
I have read commentaries and seen news reports suggesting that Jobs is the Einstein of his generation. I don't know. There are different types of genius. Einstein was a genius with physics. He could see through the equations to the extension of our reality that we call "special relativity" today. But I don't really think he was a genius in terms of people skills.
A more apt comparison is probably to the 'raison d'etre' for my and many other blogs, Walt Disney himself. Walt was a genius, not because of his great artistic skills, not because of his intellect in academics, but because of his feel for what people wanted. Walt gave people animated feature films when the prevailing wisdom held that no one would ever go sit through a cartoon of that length. Then he built these things called "theme parks" that the experts felt would never succeed. They did succeed, beyond anyone's wildest expectations, because of Walt's special genius - a gift for knowing what people liked and wanted.
Steve Jobs had this same type of genius. He didn't invent the first Apple computer; according to what I've heard, Steve Wozniak was the one who built it. He didn't invent mp3 players, or cell phones, or tablet computers. But his genius was in recognizing the potential of these devices, and how they would relate to what people actually wanted and needed. He led in shaping the direction of these implements, and others have followed, but Steve Jobs' genius has placed Apple firmly at the forefront of their development, a step ahead of their competitors.
He also exhibited his genius when he saw Pixar for what it could be. George Lucas HAD Pixar in his pocket, but didn't recognize the potential there. Jobs did. Jobs let those boys work in the direction they wanted to go, recognizing the quality of what they were doing, and gave them enough time to succeed beyond their wildest expectations - eventually being bought by Disney and making Steve Jobs one of Disney's largest (if not THE largest) shareholders.
To Steve Jobs, the Walt Disney of Technology and one of those rare folks who are legitimately known as a genius, rest in peace.
*****
I have read commentaries and seen news reports suggesting that Jobs is the Einstein of his generation. I don't know. There are different types of genius. Einstein was a genius with physics. He could see through the equations to the extension of our reality that we call "special relativity" today. But I don't really think he was a genius in terms of people skills.
A more apt comparison is probably to the 'raison d'etre' for my and many other blogs, Walt Disney himself. Walt was a genius, not because of his great artistic skills, not because of his intellect in academics, but because of his feel for what people wanted. Walt gave people animated feature films when the prevailing wisdom held that no one would ever go sit through a cartoon of that length. Then he built these things called "theme parks" that the experts felt would never succeed. They did succeed, beyond anyone's wildest expectations, because of Walt's special genius - a gift for knowing what people liked and wanted.
Steve Jobs had this same type of genius. He didn't invent the first Apple computer; according to what I've heard, Steve Wozniak was the one who built it. He didn't invent mp3 players, or cell phones, or tablet computers. But his genius was in recognizing the potential of these devices, and how they would relate to what people actually wanted and needed. He led in shaping the direction of these implements, and others have followed, but Steve Jobs' genius has placed Apple firmly at the forefront of their development, a step ahead of their competitors.
He also exhibited his genius when he saw Pixar for what it could be. George Lucas HAD Pixar in his pocket, but didn't recognize the potential there. Jobs did. Jobs let those boys work in the direction they wanted to go, recognizing the quality of what they were doing, and gave them enough time to succeed beyond their wildest expectations - eventually being bought by Disney and making Steve Jobs one of Disney's largest (if not THE largest) shareholders.
To Steve Jobs, the Walt Disney of Technology and one of those rare folks who are legitimately known as a genius, rest in peace.
*****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
