ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
I agree, but not due to visuals. They need a wider walkway. Getting to this ride will be dangerous at rope drop once it has a standby line in 2029.
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
That's because it wasn't designed for MK at all -- again, that's the whole point. The canopy serves that purpose. Since it doesn't serve that purpose at the MK, it's kind of superfluous. It doesn't make a ton of sense to have a giant showy thing that's hidden.
Of course they were never going to significantly redesign the ride (that defeats the purpose of a clone), but it seems disingenuous to suggest it makes no difference. I also don't really understand the Ratatouille mention because it's a different ride with a different design -- I'm not suggesting you're supposed to be able to see every ride. This is specific to TRON because of the way it's designed.
It's the kind of thing Disney used to care about in their parks that set them so far apart from everyone else.
Last edited:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
All attractions should be part of the designed space of a land, not just dropped around back.
Kevin_W
Well-Known Member
The Hall of Justice? (Apologies if you aren't old enough to have watched the Superfriends cartoon.)
I dont think this was just "dropped" around back. Its a major engineering feat to build this thing, esp with the train running through it and Im sure they have plans to further incorporate it into the overall tomorrowland aesthetic in the future. I think Shanghai has some kind of 5 year clause with their rides before they can be copied and if they didnt I bet this would have come to MK 5 years ago.
castlecake2.0
Well-Known Member
Will be interesting to see how they will reconfigure this area to handle the crowds.
Dunston
Well-Known Member
Woah woah woah let's keep it sfw here
DisneyDodo
Well-Known Member
I don’t understand the complaint here. Are you suggesting that Disney should have gone through the trouble of making Tron look less nice since it’s not in the most visible location? If the canopy can’t be seen from everywhere, Disney should ensure that it can’t be seen from anywhere?
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
That's not remotely what I'm saying. Changing the canopy or the placement or many other things is about making it nicer. My complaint isn't really about the canopy; it's that Disney just shoehorned it in there without actually caring about the overall design of the area and how the ride fits in that space.
They should have designed something to fit where it is. The canopy that exists in Shanghai isn't going to look anywhere near as nice at the Magic Kingdom as it does in Shanghai because it was never designed to only be visible from right in front of the building; it was designed to be visible from a distance. It's going to lose a lot of what makes it impressive in Shanghai. Either put TRON in a different place (or park) where the canopy works as intended, or design something that will actually fit the space they chose for it at the MK.
The fact that we all know Disney was never going to do that isn't an excuse for Disney -- it's an acknowledgement of how different their priorities are now.
Last edited:
DisneyDodo
Well-Known Member
The plot is in the back corner of the park. It doesn’t matter what they put there, it’s not going to be visible throughout the entire land. Unlike Shanghai’s TL, WDW’s TL was built without Tron and the entire land wasn’t designed around being able to see the canopy. From where the canopy is visible, it will be a nice new addition to the land. Where it’s not visible, things will be like they were before, and you’ll still be able to see beautiful Space Mountain.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
You're not getting the argument; you're arguing something else entirely. No one is complaining that TRON (or whatever other ride would go in that location) isn't visible overall. It's that this specific design of TRON is supposed to be visible from far away, and since it's not, the design no longer makes sense. Something different that wasn't designed to be visible from everywhere (and that doesn't look nearly as good when it's only visible up close) would make more sense. The canopy doesn't really work in that location so ideally something else should be done instead to maximize the ride and make it look better.
It's Disney being lazy compared to their height and no longer designing rides that fit the area where they are being installed.
Last edited:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Uh, no.
It is not a major engineering feat. Placing the railroad is a matter of coordination and they didn’t even need to change the canopy or coaster layout to have enough space below for the railroad. It is literally where they could drop it down the least amount of work.
Gluing some extra bits onto the rest of Tomorrowland doesn’t create a spatial design that connects the attraction to the rest of the land.
Exclusivity clauses are not automatic. They’re something extra paid for by that park and have largely been used by Hong Kong Disneyland to prevent exactly what happened with Toy Story Land. Way back once upon a time TRON would have opened five years ago because it was supposed to be co-financed by Shanghai Disneyland and Magic Kingdom. It was Magic Kingdom that decided not to move forward with the project. Now, instead of something designed for the Magic Kingdom it is being dropped in as a result of panic of the failures of NextGen.
i dont agree with any of this but to each their own
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
One benefit of it being in the corner is that you don't see the boxlike show building from around Tomorrowland, either. In Shanghai, I noticed that as much as I noticed the canopy...
E.g., from a Google Street View contributor:
(...of course, the other alternative would have been to improve the building's design, but...)
E.g., from a Google Street View contributor:
(...of course, the other alternative would have been to improve the building's design, but...)
dmw
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Why do you say that? Some of the original attractions are "around back", except for their facades.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
If you want to have you’re own facts sure. You disagree that the design didn’t change? That the project was supposed to be cofinanced? That spatial design isn’t just stuff?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
dmw
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Ah, now I understand. You were making a point that Tron's facade should have been more prominent in Tomorrowland, instead of hidden behind the speedway. I was thinking of the ride buildings that are usually hidden in the backstage area.
DisneyDodo
Well-Known Member
Nobody is denying that Disney uses direct clones to save money. What I’m not seeing is what damage Tron, exactly as it is, would be doing in this location. I’ve never been to Shanghai, so I can’t confirm or deny, but this is the first I’m hearing that the canopy doesn’t look good from up close. If that’s the case, sure, maybe they could’ve gone a different route. But I have been operating under the assumption that the canopy looks very impressive both from up close and from a distance. If so, even if it’s not visible from far away in MK, it would still make for an aesthetic improvement overall. It wouldn’t hurt MK if, from certain vantage points, you can’t see something that didn’t used to exist.