• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

The World of David Walliams: General Discussion

I mean, in the grand scheme of things what was said was in bad taste, but not really that serious. Calling someone a **** is almost a daily thing for many people. The other thing is quite common and something many of us do. I know given his postion he should not have said it, blah blah. But it is quite tame in the grand scheme of things. Therefor I cannot see it having any significant impact.

In fact, it is quite refreshing to see someone who is involved with children, having allegations made that do not involve said children, if you catch my drift.
 
DistortAMG said:
I know given his postion he should not have said it,
Click to expand...

Why not? Even that assertion makes me angry. Are people not supposed to be people, to have personalities, to have opinions, to have private conversations with colleagues? Yes they are mic'd up, but they are recording that thing for about 12 hours a day, there is simply no way for someone to be on their public persona act for that period of time.

If you think that's bad you should hear what your doctors and nurses say about you. But you don't, because you are not supposed to and dark humor is a very legitimate way of dealing with stressful situations.

What shouldn't have happened is someone with access to recordings of it should not have taken it to the papers, or when they did the papers should not have pretended it is a story and published it under an inflammatory headline for advertising revenue. All people with ulterior motives and double standards.

And then people here seem to seriously consider having to retheme something which bares his name over something so innocuous? I'm beginning to think I am in some sort of alternative reality.
 
pluk said:
Why not? Even that assertion makes me angry. Are people not supposed to be people, to have personalities, to have opinions, to have private conversations with colleagues? Yes they are mic'd up, but they are recording that thing for about 12 hours a day, there is simply no way for someone to be on their public persona act for that period of time.

If you think that's bad you should hear what your doctors and nurses say about you. But you don't, because you are not supposed to and dark humor is a very legitimate way of dealing with stressful situations.

What shouldn't have happened is someone with access to recordings of it should not have taken it to the papers, or when they did the papers should not have pretended it is a story and published it under an inflammatory headline for advertising revenue. All people with ulterior motives and double standards.

And then people here seem to seriously consider having to retheme something which bares his name over something so innocuous? I'm beginning to think I am in some sort of alternative reality.
Click to expand...

You do have a point to be fair. Haven't really got an argument against that. People are people after all. But they were still recording it was mid session I believe.
 
pluk said:
Why not? Even that assertion makes me angry. Are people not supposed to be people, to have personalities, to have opinions, to have private conversations with colleagues? Yes they are mic'd up, but they are recording that thing for about 12 hours a day, there is simply no way for someone to be on their public persona act for that period of time.

If you think that's bad you should hear what your doctors and nurses say about you. But you don't, because you are not supposed to and dark humor is a very legitimate way of dealing with stressful situations.

What shouldn't have happened is someone with access to recordings of it should not have taken it to the papers, or when they did the papers should not have pretended it is a story and published it under an inflammatory headline for advertising revenue. All people with ulterior motives and double standards.

And then people here seem to seriously consider having to retheme something which bares his name over something so innocuous? I'm beginning to think I am in some sort of alternative reality.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have put it better myself. There is no clapping "like" option, so have one here 👏👏👏
 
Actions have consequences.

Doubt it'll go much further but it'll tarnish his carefully moulded reputation a little bit (and not for the first time).

If you've got a microphone knowingly in front of you should be mindful of what you say. He wasn't for whatever reason and said the quiet bit loud. As a celebrity should be more than aware that his words and actions will be critiqued if he says anything such as this. Saying it at home is an entire difference to saying it as a judge to a contestant (Gordon Ramsay aside on Hells Kitchen, but that's the selling point of it).

More confused by his whole tirade about the girl. Like, what on earth was that about?
 
He's done more offensive stuff on purpose for broadcast than this, surely.

0_30727930-8519509-image-a-21_1594681945010.jpg
 
We're getting pretty off topic here now! Unless Towers suddenly announce some sort of (unlikely change) to Gangsta Granny, let's keep things to the ride itself rather than the rights and wrongs of what the ride's author said or didn't say. Thanks :)
 
Never liked Walliams, something about him just seems off to me. Regardless of my personal thoughts on him, Walliams World is not a great themed area. Very cheaply and half heartedly done. Hopefully although it’s a relatively new area, it won’t be around long term. Only reason I ever spend time in there is because my kids like the driving school and fart ride (even if the op cabin is just a shed from b&q).
 
Last edited:
If Universal haven’t changed their Wizarding World attractions in the face of the authors rampant transphobia and hateful remarks, Towers won’t be doing so because Walliams called someone a c-word

Back on TWoDW, is it safe to say the much anticipated Phase 2 was purely speculative? It would be expecting a lot for them to do *anything* with the area on top of Nemesis, Duel and possibly Sub Terra this Winter
 
Realistically, project Horizon could be phase 2.

Either way, phase 2 can't happen soon due to the above. An overhaul of Duel and a rebuild of Nemesis is enough to do, let alone possible NST works or anything else they're up to
 
Poisson said:
Realistically, project Horizon could be phase 2.

Either way, phase 2 can't happen soon due to the above. An overhaul of Duel and a rebuild of Nemesis is enough to do, let alone possible NST works or anything else they're up to
Click to expand...
I personally doubt that Project Horizon has anything to do with TWODW simply due to the fact that it appears to have a separate entrance archway located near the Dungeons, and it does not appear to be directly accessible whatsoever from within TWODW’s present footprint.

That’s not to say that it won’t be part of TWODW, but I’d say that it looks unlikely on the basis of where its entrance is located and the fact that it has an entirely separate entrance archway of its own.
 
Last edited:
As someone did mention before, can't remember it on this thread or not, is that it was deliberately made half baked by Towers as it was forced on them and that when the time comes to change the area them, again, it'll likely tie into Project Horizon in which in a best case scenario, the Dungeons building will become a proper farm ride once again with that entire giant area sharing the same theme.

Wonder how long the license to keep TWODW is around for?
 
Never liked Walliams world from the start outside of its entrance plaza and area music. There doesn't seem to be a sense of passion that a lot of Areas in Theme parks carry. Thomas Land is a perfect example of how an IP land should be done. You can tell that the people who made it were really passionate when designing and constructing it, and really wanted to create a good guest experience, and they excelled. It's incredibly faithful to the original show, especially how it looks like a giant model set you're walking in with the large model people figures riddled around the land.

Walliams World just feels emotionless, processed, like Fast food; it isn't bad, but it isn't that good either. Its really evident of a lacklustre cash grab. The Paint on the surrounding architecture is horrific, the rides are really tacky outside of the carousel and GG the ride, which the latter is still a really underwhelming Dark Ride outside of its smell pods and final scene. It doesn't have a good consistency either.

Next area to replace Walliams World should absolutely be an original Concept whilst not being too childish. Like what @QTXAdsy has mentioned, a Port Discovery inspired area without itself taken too serious would be wonderful. An area aimed for 8-10 year olds. I think Creds Street was aimed at the same demographic as well, and it does show that an area aimed around older kids without being serious or too Over The Top can be done in a great quality.
 
Last edited:
I still can't believe how bad that area is. It's still one of the better areas at Towers as built, but has been abused horrifically with poor decisions. The Burger Kitchen isn't a bad looking building, the pathways and trees are lovely and the facade of the theatre is quite pretty. How can they have messed this area up so badly over the past 2 decades?

Whether this Horizon building and small area is decent or not is neither here nor there, I can't see how it's inclusion will likely make anything any better, it could even make it worse.

At best we can hope for the Dungeons to bugger off and the BK up to Horizon to look decent and in keeping, but you'll still have to somehow not have to glance right when walking through it whilst walking past the grand facade of a theater caked in purple paint followed by a weird primary coloured back alley tucked behind the Towers. At worst, the Dungeons will stay and the whole corner will look a horrible mess of mismatched themes and colours even more so that it does today. It's already starting to look like one of those cars you see where the owner has replaced some of their body panels with different coloured ones from the local scrappy.

I'd like them to retheme to whole lot back to some form of Victorian steet as built for cohesion and just keep the Walliams themed rides within it in isolation all under one area name. GG wouldn't have to change, Gallopers wouldn't have to change, Frog Hopper and the Sizzler could just live inside the buildings. The World of Walliams is actually a title for the series of books, not an actual "World" or area in the park so I see no reason why these attractions can't live inside a wider themed area if the IP isn't big enough to fill the area entirely.
 
Matt.GC said:
Wow, what a sensitive country we live in where things like this cause so much offence that it reaches the evening new headlines.
Click to expand...

Given the reaction some outlets have when someone doesn't wear a poppy (for example).

All the media (left & right) is full of clickbait nonsense. But those who work in media should be more than aware that their behaviour is far more likely to be heard or seen and scrutinised.

Simplifying it down to "just calling someone a name" clearly ignores the context of the situation.

As for the area, not seen it. Don't really care as its not for me. Sounds of it though the park can change it if they wanted without too much effort (I.e. the amount the put into it in the first place).

The Potter comparison is one to consider. Is the content bigger than the author? Given how it kick-started Universal since opening you're not surprised by their usage of it, but does it separate enough from the author being an awful person?

As I said, actions have consequences. Even if you think you're untouchable like some celebrities do. And they should be far more aware of the consequences of questionable actions (which allegedly go much further for Walliams looking online).
 
Benzin said:
Given the reaction some outlets have when someone doesn't wear a poppy (for example).

All the media (left & right) is full of clickbait nonsense. But those who work in media should be more than aware that their behaviour is far more likely to be heard or seen and scrutinised.

Simplifying it down to "just calling someone a name" clearly ignores the context of the situation.

As for the area, not seen it. Don't really care as its not for me. Sounds of it though the park can change it if they wanted without too much effort (I.e. the amount the put into it in the first place).

The Potter comparison is one to consider. Is the content bigger than the author? Given how it kick-started Universal since opening you're not surprised by their usage of it, but does it separate enough from the author being an awful person?

As I said, actions have consequences. Even if you think you're untouchable like some celebrities do. And they should be far more aware of the consequences of questionable actions (which allegedly go much further for Walliams looking online).
Click to expand...

Also the Harry Potter areas of Universal are clearly based on the Warner Bros films, featuring the actors who portrayed those characters and the set desingers etc who created the films, whereas the Walliams area is based directly on the books and the art of Quentin Blake used to illustrate those books, there is a more direct link to the author.
However I really don't seen AT taking any action over a few small comments unrelated to the books. If the incident happened at a book event and he called a child a rude word then maybe it would be different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top