Do you like the idea of Philippines copying the worlds famous land mark?

Isn't copying a compliment? Children copying parents! Children copying the adults! And copying good examples!

You mean like the Americans in having copies of the Eiffel Tower, and the Pyramids etc. I've seen such copies in other countries too. It isn't unique to the Philippines. It appears to be common with the human race. Here in Australia we have a copy of Stonehenge from the UK.

I see nothing wrong with it. What could be wrong with opening a DISNEYLAND in the Philippines? If money allows it, why not? Its for those who cannot travel out of the country to other places where original land marks are. Like, why not have some historical event hosted by the Philippines? Yes, someone will say, why would the government spend money on that? Well, what if its done by some private investor? Don't be so close minded. Not everyone can afford to travel. So, why not let them pretend they are there and be proud of their country's own replica.

it depends on how it is done las vegas is full of imitations. the casinos build replicas of world famous monuments to differentiate themselves from the other casinos the walk of fame i think is a good one. there are many showbusiness personalities who are very famous only in the philippines. why not have a walk of fame in quezon? at least filipinos have a chance of going there if they wish. most filipinos are very very unlikely to be able to visit hollywood. would it be wrong for the stars of india's bollywood to have a walk of fame in an indian city? personally i have no interest in any "walk of fame". i'd love to go to brazil, but not to see the christ on the hill (although if i was there i would certainly have a look) some things are ok to replicate, others are not. manila does not need pyramids, or eiffel towers, but a walk of fame, or a giant christ statue in a devoutly catholic country are not worthy of condemnation

I don't have a problem with that, as long as they stay true and in a way pay homage to the original. Everything in one place. It's easier to go around, much more fun, and convenient. No need to go to far away places, plus one avoids the hassles such as documentation and money in traveling to where the original item is found. For many folks, visiting these landmarks is an impossibility. We all know they are just replicas, so it will not kill the excitement of visiting and seeing the real things. I can't see how you can compare traveling by jeepney and by plane to get to these places. It is okay to imitate as a form of inspiration and expression, and pretty soon everyone's own unique character will come out.

If it is done to attract tourists, then it is not a good idea. BUT, for those in your country who do not have the means to travel around the world, then it is a good idea. What is so wrong with that?

depends on the kinds of landmark if for instance, a pyramid, nah, Egypt has it, south america has it,even china has some pyramid though they differ in architectural design and this were from the past. But if some pinoy today who believe in the power of the pyramid and created a building in this structure for mystic healing and it works, it would be a world marvel. a hollywood style marker for famous actors and actresses is not a bad plagiarism. It is a monument for stars. some places are worth copying because we also have the same experiences or history. If fund would be available , I would love to have a galleon ship permanently stationed at the Manila Bay. That would be copying other states who have ancient ships at their harbor serving as a museum.

The Enchanted Kingdom is a lot like Disneyland but still very popular with Filipinos. Not everyone can travel to USA to visit the original.

a travel agency in Singapore put the silhouette of an Iglesia Ni Cristo building in one of its ads on the MRT to promote travel to the Philippines the same way it did with Tokyo Tower for Japan and the Sydney Opera House for Australia... that alone says that other counties have no idea what man-made landmark best associates our country. i think the question you should be asking is if it's really necessary for the Philippines to have a world-famous landmark. Singapore has the Esplanade (Marina Bay Sands isn't uniquely Singaporean), Malaysia has the Petronas Towers... both structures with aesthetic value and a significant purpose. i'd like to see us have something like those landmarks. i just think that before it's even broken ground, it's obviously going to be an overpriced white elephant and we're just better off renovating the decades-old structures we still have in Manila.