News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom

[J4546]

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]

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...)

 

[dmw]

All attractions should be part of the designed space of a land, not just dropped around back.

Why do you say that? Some of the original attractions are "around back", except for their facades.

 

[lazyboy97o]

i dont agree with any of this but to each their own

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]

Why do you say that? Some of the original attractions are "around back", except for their facades.

The facade is how the attraction interfaces with the land. It is part of the spatial experience of the land.

 

[dmw]

The facade is how the attraction interfaces with the land. It is part of the spatial experience of the land.

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]

You're completely missing the point -- 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 else should be done instead to maximize it.

It's Disney being lazy compared to their height and no longer caring about actually designing rides that look good where they are being installed.

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.

 

[UNCgolf]

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.

Oh, I think that's the disconnect -- I don't think anyone is arguing that the ride is doing damage there. I'm certainly not suggesting that building the ride itself was a mistake or anything like that. We're simply saying that the ride as designed is nowhere near as effective/impressive as it is in Shanghai, and instead of changing the facade to fit the area and maximize the effectiveness, they just left it as is. It doesn't really make sense in the location.

Also, I didn't say it doesn't look good at all, but it's certainly less impressive up close based on photos and videos (I haven't been to Shanghai). It was designed to attract from afar and that's where it looks the best. I think it's going to look out of scale at the MK.

I think the simplest way to put it is this: if Disney was designing a new ride from scratch to put in that location, I don't think anyone would expect them to put a canopy like that in the plans. It's just not good design for the plot. There are tons of other options that would make more sense and look better.

 

[J4546]

also they were originally supposed to retheme/upgrade the speedway as well right? I think the canopy is gonna look pretty amazing from the pathway in front of the speedway.

 

[corran horn]

The Hall of Justice? (Apologies if you aren't old enough to have watched the Superfriends cartoon.)

Oh, I'm old enough to have the Superman with the Kryptonite ring that knocked him over and the Flash with the pumping legs.

 

[corran horn]

Oh, I think that's the disconnect -- I don't think anyone is arguing that the ride is doing damage there. I'm certainly not suggesting that building the ride itself was a mistake or anything like that. We're simply saying that the ride as designed is nowhere near as effective/impressive as it is in Shanghai, and instead of changing the facade to fit the area and maximize the effectiveness, they just left it as is. It doesn't really make sense in the location.

Also, I didn't say it doesn't look good at all, but it's certainly less impressive up close based on photos and videos (I haven't been to Shanghai). It was designed to attract from afar and that's where it looks the best. I think it's going to look out of scale at the MK.

I think the simplest way to put it is this: if Disney was designing a new ride from scratch to put in that location, I don't think anyone would expect them to put a canopy like that in the plans. It's just not good design for the plot. There are tons of other options that would make more sense and look better.

100% agreed. This design is wasted in that spot.

Lets say you were playing Rollercoaster Tycoon (or more recently, Jurassic World Evolution) and you've got a set landmass map. It ain't getting any bigger. And you've been playing for a while and your park is successful so you don't want to destroy anything, but you want to build a new pre-designed attraction . The problem is, you've only got 'leftover' footprints of land to do it in. So sure, you can pick a ready-made structure and cant it in some weird way to make it fit - but is that really the best way to show off the new ride? Or did you just do it that way because it's all the space you had and (in the games at least) you couldn't change the building?

 

[castlecake2.0]

Maybe it’s strategic placement for when speedway is removed...

 

[UNCgolf]

Maybe it’s strategic placement for when speedway is removed...

The Speedway will be there forever. 150 years from now, Disney World will be closed and in ruins, and yet the Speedway will somehow still have cars going around the track.

 

[J4546]

thats waht Im saying. From the walkway in front of speedway it would be a crazy impressive sight to behold and I think they are gonna do something with the speedway to take advantage of the view

 

[lazyboy97o]

Talk about stretching for excuses. “This is good because they could possibly do something good some time in the future.” TRON was dropped where it would fit. That’s it. It is not part of some grand plan to reconfigure or redevelop the Speedway site.

 

[Joffrey]

The Speedway will be there forever. 150 years from now, Disney World will be closed and in ruins, and yet the Speedway will somehow still have cars going around the track.

Still using gas.

The best thing for Speedway would be to make a deal with Tesla and replace all the go-carts with EVs. Reduce both the noise and exhaust pollution and would be more representative of "Tomorrow" Land.

Regarding Tron's position, how many places can you see Thunder Mountain from?

 

[MisterPenguin]

i dont agree with any of this but to each their own

I sometimes disagree with some of @lazyboy97o's ideas regarding what makes good or bad theming... but that's a matter of opinion and balancing ideals v. practicalities.

What I don't do is disagree with his facts. If he says "X happened," it happened. If he says, "The code only allows Y", then the code only allows Y.

Claiming that his facts are merely opinion that you can disagree with them is just plain wrong. People don't like to engage with people who ignore facts.

Sometimes you have to accept facts you don't like or find inconvenient.

 

[J4546]

I ssometimes disagree with some of @lazyboy97o's ideas regarding what makes good or bad theming... but that's a matter of opinion and balancing ideals v. practicalities.

What I don't do is disagree with his facts. If he says "X happened," it happened. If he says, "The code only allows Y", then the code only allows Y.

Claiming that his facts are merely opinion that you can disagree with them is just plain wrong. People don't like to engage with people who ignore facts.

Sometimes you have to accept facts you don't like or find inconvenient.

im not claiming anything other than i disagree with his opinions. I stated tron canopy is a major engineering feat esp with the train running under it and having to build a tunnel for it and he got y and said it wasnt. I think it is. I think the entire canopy is a marvel of engineering, I think there is a lot of work that goes into all of it, from pathways, to train tunnels. I guess some people dont but that doesnt make my or his opinion more or less right.

i also never mentions glueing extra bits of theming around tomorrowland

hes just twisting what ive said to fit his pesimistic narrative that disney is always doing wrong. And im not going to get into an argument on a disney parks forum about a rollercoaster lol I cant wait for it to open, it looks pretty awesome and will breathe a ton of life into a dead area of the park

 

[J4546]

Talk about stretching for excuses. “This is good because they could possibly do something good some time in the future.” TRON was dropped where it would fit. That’s it. It is not part of some grand plan to reconfigure or redevelop the Speedway site.

but there was a plan wasnt there? I coulda sworn that disney was gonna redo the speedway when they announced tron but then they cut it because covid? But i could be wrong

 

[lazyboy97o]

but there was a plan wasnt there? I coulda sworn that disney was gonna redo the speedway when they announced tron but then they cut it because covid? But i could be wrong

There was consideration of making it more TRON looking, but that is not anywhere similar to a major reconfiguration.