Still Beautiful After All These Years
- Thread starter GrandpaD
- Start date
Those parks have to design guest-facing areas for substantially greater average attendance, and sustain that year-round. Different game with no off-season.
Despite that, I find AK to be a thoroughly qualified contender for the title.
Despite that, I find AK to be a thoroughly qualified contender for the title.
Dinoland kills it though.
Yeah, I don’t understand Dinoland USA at all. I get what they seemed to be aiming for, but why? And the result is pretty bad.
Rest of the park more than makes up for it IMO. YMMV.
Rest of the park more than makes up for it IMO. YMMV.
Dinoland USA is one of the best themed lands. It's perfect in every sense.
I honestly think that Epcot during the Flower and Garden Festival can definitely give BGW a run for their money. I think their problem is that they don't do it all year.
In all reality I think the biggest reason why these other parks don't compete is that BGW takes advantage of their terrain. Other parks are largely on level ground. Also BGW has so much forest still everywhere in the middle.
Last edited:
@tursiops to be fair, that's kinda what happened. It was between Beastly Kingdom (unbuilt) and Dinoland, when DAK was finishing up. Dinoland won and got the last of the budget, Beastly Kingdom was put on hold and Camp Minnie Mickey was "built" as a place holder. Pandora was built on land that wasn't used at all basically, versus having to tear down actual attractions. The only thing over there that needed to move was Festival of the Lion King, everything else over where Pandora is now was meet and greets.
Anyways, Dinoland is still a great concept and executed perfectly, and this is a hill I will die on.
Anyways, Dinoland is still a great concept and executed perfectly, and this is a hill I will die on.
EuropaPark has been my home park growing up. It's pretty beautiful theming wise.
BGW is quite special though in how well the park is fitting itself into the available landscape rather than dropping a bunch of rides on a flat piece of land.
Something that I think really benefits BGW over UO/WDW/WDL/EuropaPark (although some might know more than me); BGW had natural landscaping. It's easier to really augment natural landscape than it is to create a landscape from nothing (or harsh natural habitat). So when the backdrop of rolling hills and trees are there already, adding flowers, shrubbery, and other touches; they really augment each other.
This is just my personal opinion of WDW and why they won't have many of their parks win:
There's good bits that are beautiful, but they are based on SciFi and other fantasy stories and imagery. How do you properly rate something like AK with Pandora or DHS with Galaxy's Edge which have a mix of fake and real flowers/plants to be able to pull off the scifi elements against all of BGW which is based on real places and uses real plant life all the way around? Wouldn't the aspect of some of those parks having SciFi areas that require artificial plants make it easier to be 'beautiful'?
This is just my personal opinion of WDW and why they won't have many of their parks win:
There's good bits that are beautiful, but they are based on SciFi and other fantasy stories and imagery. How do you properly rate something like AK with Pandora or DHS with Galaxy's Edge which have a mix of fake and real flowers/plants to be able to pull off the scifi elements against all of BGW which is based on real places and uses real plant life all the way around? Wouldn't the aspect of some of those parks having SciFi areas that require artificial plants make it easier to be 'beautiful'?
I think something the park does very well is bringing guests into these super tight spaces, and then opening up, and then closing it again for another reveal.
For example, in England upon entering the park there's just a quaint little fountain as the center piece, and the rather dull guest relations off to the right. It's a very small and tight entrance, very underwhelming in a sense, you then turn a corner slightly and go under the archway to then enter a large, open area, England, with lot's of movement and sounds and shops. Another example of this is Germany. If you don't take the classic short-cut through the snack stand and enter through the traditional entrance, we're greeted with a small little archway and then get to travel through a tight and charming German village. We then turn a corner and go underneath an archway to be shown a massive clock and fountain. Another classic example is Das Festhaus. The outside is this incredibly detailed facade with authentic paintings and stained glass. We enter under these tight archways, to be given a view of a small store and bar, and then go underneath another archway to be given a grand reveal of the whole eatery in a astounding way. There's a village facade lining the walls, a stage with props on it in the center, and a lot of movement between guests with the actual eatery and the Brauhaus, allowing us to feel like we're in somewhere alive. It makes these romanticized versions of Europe found in the heart of South Eastern Virginia seem so real.
The idea of small space to big space, to make an area seem more grand, is a classic theme park trick that dates back to the orignal theme park, Disneyland. When you enter Disneyland, or any of the kingdom parks world wide, you're greeted with just the train station and a floral display, where is that castle? We've seen it on all of the advertisements and waited months to be here, where is my grand reveal? We then have to turn a corner, go through this tight tunnel, take another turn, and then the views unravels and the sightline opens up as the castle and main street come into view in an incredibly overwhelming and powerful way. People are crying kids are laughing Main Street is hustling and bustling, this moment is going to be engrained in your memory forever, theme park nerd or not. This technique of small space followed by big space is still used regularly today across the industry. At the various Harry Potter lands, when we enter all we see is the bare bones Hogsmeade arch, and then we enter into this humungous area with lots of kinetic energy and this enormous castle beckoning us in to explore and go deeper. Universal even improved on this idea with the Diagon Alley facade, tricking guests into going, hold up, where is this new Harry Potter land we were promised? All I see is this two-dimensional London facade, it looks nice, but it's not Diagon Alley. You're forced to think as a guest and find the almost hidden entrance to then be greeted with a grand reveal. Disney is even still using it today with Star Wars Land. We enter through this tight tunnel, followed by a winding walk, for it to slowly turn into this grand reveal of Batuu. It's a clever way to save space and make parts of the park seem larger than they are by only allowing us to view them one at a time. It separates the areas into these distinct, memorable places that we can remember, and it makes them feel colossal at times compared to their actual size.
As mentioned in the 40th anniversary documentary, the park is also at such an advantage with it's natural landscape. No other park in North America at least is going to be built in the style of BGW with hills, rivers, streams, sky rides, trains, and all these massive kinetic machines surrounded by such raw, natural landscapes. The park doesn't feel like it's just a continuation of the flat parking lot nearby, as many parks do, it feels like an organic experience, like they designed the park around the pre-existing landscape. So much of the beauty found in the park was already there, they just took the natural Williamsburg landscape and integrated the park into it. Yes, the landscaping was much better years ago, it still looks great, when the landscaping department isn't furloughed, but it only compliments what's already there. They could just give up and the park would still look gorgeous with all of the trees and natural valleys separating the hamlets. The park didn't do any of that, it just happens to be their courtesy of mother nature. The actual landscaping, flower beds, and shrubbery only pales in comparison to the beauty of the untamed wilderness that is the heart and soul of this park.
This park is a hybrid of theming and landscaping that few places come even close to. It uses quaint little hamlets followed by beautiful scenery, which is a mixture of maintained landscaping and natural beauty. Parks like Epcot and DAK are beautiful in their own right and are definitely contenders for the award, but they feel like beautiful themed parks. The land was always barren and flat, Disney had to go in and beautify what once was Orange Groves into their desired environment. BGW feels like more than that, there could be no rides, no theming, and this could simply be a park with some dirt hiking trails in Williamsburg, and it would still be what it does best, a beautiful park. It's just a bonus that there happens to be a highly themed park on top of this land.
For example, in England upon entering the park there's just a quaint little fountain as the center piece, and the rather dull guest relations off to the right. It's a very small and tight entrance, very underwhelming in a sense, you then turn a corner slightly and go under the archway to then enter a large, open area, England, with lot's of movement and sounds and shops. Another example of this is Germany. If you don't take the classic short-cut through the snack stand and enter through the traditional entrance, we're greeted with a small little archway and then get to travel through a tight and charming German village. We then turn a corner and go underneath an archway to be shown a massive clock and fountain. Another classic example is Das Festhaus. The outside is this incredibly detailed facade with authentic paintings and stained glass. We enter under these tight archways, to be given a view of a small store and bar, and then go underneath another archway to be given a grand reveal of the whole eatery in a astounding way. There's a village facade lining the walls, a stage with props on it in the center, and a lot of movement between guests with the actual eatery and the Brauhaus, allowing us to feel like we're in somewhere alive. It makes these romanticized versions of Europe found in the heart of South Eastern Virginia seem so real.
The idea of small space to big space, to make an area seem more grand, is a classic theme park trick that dates back to the orignal theme park, Disneyland. When you enter Disneyland, or any of the kingdom parks world wide, you're greeted with just the train station and a floral display, where is that castle? We've seen it on all of the advertisements and waited months to be here, where is my grand reveal? We then have to turn a corner, go through this tight tunnel, take another turn, and then the views unravels and the sightline opens up as the castle and main street come into view in an incredibly overwhelming and powerful way. People are crying kids are laughing Main Street is hustling and bustling, this moment is going to be engrained in your memory forever, theme park nerd or not. This technique of small space followed by big space is still used regularly today across the industry. At the various Harry Potter lands, when we enter all we see is the bare bones Hogsmeade arch, and then we enter into this humungous area with lots of kinetic energy and this enormous castle beckoning us in to explore and go deeper. Universal even improved on this idea with the Diagon Alley facade, tricking guests into going, hold up, where is this new Harry Potter land we were promised? All I see is this two-dimensional London facade, it looks nice, but it's not Diagon Alley. You're forced to think as a guest and find the almost hidden entrance to then be greeted with a grand reveal. Disney is even still using it today with Star Wars Land. We enter through this tight tunnel, followed by a winding walk, for it to slowly turn into this grand reveal of Batuu. It's a clever way to save space and make parts of the park seem larger than they are by only allowing us to view them one at a time. It separates the areas into these distinct, memorable places that we can remember, and it makes them feel colossal at times compared to their actual size.
As mentioned in the 40th anniversary documentary, the park is also at such an advantage with it's natural landscape. No other park in North America at least is going to be built in the style of BGW with hills, rivers, streams, sky rides, trains, and all these massive kinetic machines surrounded by such raw, natural landscapes. The park doesn't feel like it's just a continuation of the flat parking lot nearby, as many parks do, it feels like an organic experience, like they designed the park around the pre-existing landscape. So much of the beauty found in the park was already there, they just took the natural Williamsburg landscape and integrated the park into it. Yes, the landscaping was much better years ago, it still looks great, when the landscaping department isn't furloughed, but it only compliments what's already there. They could just give up and the park would still look gorgeous with all of the trees and natural valleys separating the hamlets. The park didn't do any of that, it just happens to be their courtesy of mother nature. The actual landscaping, flower beds, and shrubbery only pales in comparison to the beauty of the untamed wilderness that is the heart and soul of this park.
This park is a hybrid of theming and landscaping that few places come even close to. It uses quaint little hamlets followed by beautiful scenery, which is a mixture of maintained landscaping and natural beauty. Parks like Epcot and DAK are beautiful in their own right and are definitely contenders for the award, but they feel like beautiful themed parks. The land was always barren and flat, Disney had to go in and beautify what once was Orange Groves into their desired environment. BGW feels like more than that, there could be no rides, no theming, and this could simply be a park with some dirt hiking trails in Williamsburg, and it would still be what it does best, a beautiful park. It's just a bonus that there happens to be a highly themed park on top of this land.
Last edited:
For a quick cynical take...
BGW will continue to have the reputation for beauty regardless of how it actually compares to other parks, because it is an agreed-upon truth across the community. Traditions like these are hard to change, short of a seismic event (like the addition of the Harry Potter sections at Uni).
Additionally, I think people look for ways to recognize parks that are not Disney and Uni, or the big two would probably sweep all categories. So, regardless of how gorgeous any Disney park may be, it does not have a comparative advantage (to steal a concept from economics) in beauty. The Disney park may technically be prettier or more scenic or better maintained, but BGW will still be the go-to for beauty.
All of that said, over time, opinions can erode, and BGW will need to start making more of effort (in my opinion) to continue to maintain its reputation in the long (or possible medium) term. Additionally, Gilroy Gardens is still prettier to me.
Edit: one very unpopular opinion. Animal Kingdom incorporates all of the least pleasant aspects of Karachi with endless and hot paths, leading to No Animals on Display. I, personally, cannot find beauty in an experience I consistently find so unpleasant. (And I say this as someone who loves South Asia.)
BGW will continue to have the reputation for beauty regardless of how it actually compares to other parks, because it is an agreed-upon truth across the community. Traditions like these are hard to change, short of a seismic event (like the addition of the Harry Potter sections at Uni).
Additionally, I think people look for ways to recognize parks that are not Disney and Uni, or the big two would probably sweep all categories. So, regardless of how gorgeous any Disney park may be, it does not have a comparative advantage (to steal a concept from economics) in beauty. The Disney park may technically be prettier or more scenic or better maintained, but BGW will still be the go-to for beauty.
All of that said, over time, opinions can erode, and BGW will need to start making more of effort (in my opinion) to continue to maintain its reputation in the long (or possible medium) term. Additionally, Gilroy Gardens is still prettier to me.
Edit: one very unpopular opinion. Animal Kingdom incorporates all of the least pleasant aspects of Karachi with endless and hot paths, leading to No Animals on Display. I, personally, cannot find beauty in an experience I consistently find so unpleasant. (And I say this as someone who loves South Asia.)
Last edited:
How can beauty ever be objectively measured?
Were I a voting member for the awards, I could easily find other parks more beautiful to me even if they're considered parking lot parks (totally an example not based on my real opinion), and who's to say I'm wrong with any degree of authority?
Were I a voting member for the awards, I could easily find other parks more beautiful to me even if they're considered parking lot parks (totally an example not based on my real opinion), and who's to say I'm wrong with any degree of authority?
I find Seaworld Orlando to be a very beautiful park. We were there last June and even with the heat and the crowd it was still a good experience. The plants, flowers and pathways are very well staged and landscaped. There were a few areas that could use some attention, but overall I thought it was much better than BGW.
I think what all of it ultimately comes down to is that really just beautiful park is more about landscaping and not as much about theming. That's why a park like DisneySea won't win. They are beautiful but it's all theming and not as much landscaping. This is what @warfelg was talking about in regards to the scifi theming at Disney and other places.
Ultimately I think it's what @Connor said. BGW has great theming, then you add in the beautiful natural surroundings and the incredible landscaping, you have a park that is hard to compete with.
Ultimately I think it's what @Connor said. BGW has great theming, then you add in the beautiful natural surroundings and the incredible landscaping, you have a park that is hard to compete with.
Another thing it has is inertia. BGW has won for so long against essentially the same competition (new parks are rare) that it would either take a herculean effort at another park or BGW just really giving up. If the status quo remains essentially the same, the voters have more or less backed themselves into a corner.