|
|
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:15:08 -0000 I was on board Queen Mary 2 yesterday as well and mostly agree with Clive's comments. The few with which I disagree are below, and I'll finish with a few more observations. As always, personal views on anything differ. I quite liked the Tapestry in the Britannia Restaurant. This room effectively spreads over three deck with the upper level of the room being tiered. We sat in the second tier of the upper level for lunch (I agree that the lamb was pretty good) but I think that anyone allocated to the top level (with its normal height ceiling) would be a bit disappointed, having walked through the loftier areas. There was certainly too much going on in the decor of the Queens Room, but if it hadn't been full of visitors waiting to disembark it would have been easier to have seen if came close to working. The forward end of the casino was rather elegant, with a mural and attractive ceiling recessed with some pleasant lighting. Rather wasted as a casino! That said, I was pleasantly surprised that the casino wasn't larger. I didn't consider the Golden Lion Pub to be at all nasty, but it isn't really the place you'd find me drinking. It is so much like the so-styled English Pubs on other cruise ships and ferries. I guess that it's a bit like a highly polished version of one of the UK's big chain pubs. I don't often use them either. We didn't get to see the Queens Grill, but thought the Princess Grill rather ordinary, and certainly without the style and intimacy of the Princess and Britannia Grills on the QE2. I too would avoid the Kings Court. Sterile and cheerless are good words to describe this area. I also thought that this area seemed out of place and would be better near the open after deck, or one of the open decks at the top of the ship. I thought that the Winter Garden was all right. No more no less. I also thought about what useful things could have been put in place of the enormous spa and fitness centre. My first impression on entering the Todd English restaurant was 'why have all those chairs got protective grey covers on them? On closer examination it seems that they are not protective covers. The second impression was that of pretension. Virtually every alternative dining room I've seen exudes an air of pretentiousness. This one is no exception. Clive didn't mention the Atlantic Room, another pleasant forward facing observation lounge and card room. On the opposite side of the Commodore Club to Clive's 'suburban sitting room' was another attractive area, Churchills, the 'cigar room'. There was a vast amount of wooden deck furniture on board, I didn't actually notice the plastic stuff. The open decks are large and plentiful, but I felt that the 3 flight outside staircases at the stern of the ship had the potential to be quite dangerous. The decks also seemed very slippery, even though they were dry. The partially enclosed observation area above the bridge was also a rather good idea. We also saw the Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth Suites at the forward end of the ship. These were exceptionally good. One more negative has just sprung to mind. The lower balcony cabins, within the hull or lower superstructure have balconies that I can, unfortunately, only describe as nasty. They are small, claustrophobic, dark...... This space would have been much better incorporated into the cabin to give a larger 'outside' cabin. If all of this seems negative, it is certainly not meant to be. There is so much about this ship that is good that it's easy to concentrate on the negative aspects, of which there are, in reality very few. The ship is very big - too big really. Would I sail on this ship? Yes, no hesitation. I can't decide, though if I'd rather cruise or cross, but I guess that if I crossed I wouldn't later want to cruise. Maybe though, just maybe the ship has got something about her that would mean I'd be happy with either in any order. Bill, in a wet Windsor, England just back from a QM2 photo shoot on a boat with the American Press group. |
|