FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
I'll take a dozen giant animatronics popping out of the darkness over one big snake and a hallway of indoor blacklight minigolf skeleton murals.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Suspirian
Well-Known Member
As a Wescoaster I never thought one was better than the other. I think they both achieve what they're trying to do successfully.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
I actually do love IJA, but I do think its fans overlook its flaws when dunking on Dinosaur's flaws.
DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
So hopeful that this means Disney is aware that many fans want amazing theming, vs. an IP dump. If done properly this could be a beautiful addition to AK.
Geographically as well. Encanto is set in early 1950s Colombia; Crystal Skull is set in late 1950s Peru.
Not that I expect them to reference Crystal Skull in any way, but the two locales and time periods do line up in a very cohesive way.
WaltsTreasureChest
Well-Known Member
Wait a second…
^^That’s the Disney Tokyo Indy ride! Guess we know what to expect:
^^That’s the Disney Tokyo Indy ride! Guess we know what to expect:
brb1006
Well-Known Member
I strongly agree with you on those points. While discussions about Disney Characters/IPs have gotten very heated and viewed negatively in the Disney Parks Community (especially from WDW and Epcpt fans) in recent years. I prefer if Disney handled some of their characters as ambassadors or teachers (particular at Epcot).
I know how controversial it gets from hardcore Epcot fans when it comes to Disney Characters at the park. But I could see at least a few Disney Films that would actually fit at some areas at Epcot.
The Aristocats (like the film or not) would actually fit perfectly at the France Pavilion compared to the awful BATB Sing-Along (which is a retelling of the film from Lefou's perspective). I could see an AA show starring Duchess' Kittens (two are musicans and one an artist) with help from other animal characters from the film educating guests about France's history of music and art. Since Madame Adrlaide Bonfamie was a former opera singer. Taking cues from Impressions de France
Meanwhile, The Three Caballeros ride at Mexico is just Panchito and Jose searching for Donald while Frozen Ever After at Norway is just a midquel to Frozen II and focuses on the films' best musical numbers.
Last edited:
Captain Neo
Well-Known Member
Honestly the writing was on the wall for Dinoland U.S.A. from day one
Joe Rhode's vision of it being themed to some cheap roadside attraction combined with Eisner and Presslers budget cuts just led to a really poor looking area of an otherwise fantastically themed park. The original e-ticket Countdown to Extinction was also never really that great and was later toned down and tied into a movie that outright bombed at the boxoffice. The Dinosaur AA on the River that was meant to promote the land never worked right and was removed within the first few months of operation.
The dinosaur area of the park could and SHOULD have been far grander especially since the park opened just a few years after Jurassic Park released. But alas neither Eisner or Rhode had the conviction to make the land successful. The "expansion" where they added the carnival rides to the land just added insult to injury. It won't be missed.
Joe Rhode's vision of it being themed to some cheap roadside attraction combined with Eisner and Presslers budget cuts just led to a really poor looking area of an otherwise fantastically themed park. The original e-ticket Countdown to Extinction was also never really that great and was later toned down and tied into a movie that outright bombed at the boxoffice. The Dinosaur AA on the River that was meant to promote the land never worked right and was removed within the first few months of operation.
The dinosaur area of the park could and SHOULD have been far grander especially since the park opened just a few years after Jurassic Park released. But alas neither Eisner or Rhode had the conviction to make the land successful. The "expansion" where they added the carnival rides to the land just added insult to injury. It won't be missed.
Twirlnhurl
Well-Known Member
I hope they don't make he majority of the ride take place in a jungle. To me, that is the primary reason why Dinosaur is inferior to Indiana Jones Adventure. So much of the show building is narrow corridors, with tiny sets (compared to the size of the vehicle). Indiana Jones Adventure works because it is inside a temple which is supposed to be claustrophobic and small (except for the grand central chamber). But achieveing a convincing jungle in those corridors is nearly impossible. Dinosaur certainly didn't figure out how to do it...
Captain Neo
Well-Known Member
Yea I don't think its going to simply be a clone of the Disneyland version. It's either going to be its own thing or borrow heavily from the Tokyo version.
Captain Neo
Well-Known Member
Just a final thought: Rhode and WDI should have dropped the "Animal Kingdom represents animals real, imaginary, and extinct" during bluesky planning when it was clear no portion of Beastly Kingdom was getting built as part of the opening year. The park should have just opened with the Americas and an Indiana Jones attraction in the first place. It would have made more sense and been more popular all this time.
It was a mistake to get peoples hopes up.
It was a mistake to get peoples hopes up.
Movielover
Well-Known Member
Also, backstage rooms are different, hence why the overall building shape looks different between the two.
The track layouts are 95 percent the same except for the mummy room and mudslide sections. In Indy the mummy room is an additional curve section before the bug room turnaround. This part in Dinosaur is just a straight segment to make room for the first Carno AA. The mudslide section/ downhill section has a slight bend in it on Indy whereas in Dino is straighter. Plus, I think there are more walls in Dino that separate the scenes so yeah, 95 percent the same but some scenes would need slight changes, or more drastic structural changes to the building in order to bring the layout the same as Indy.
Dinoman96
Well-Known Member
It was also freaking ridiculous that they never bothered to ever scrub out the references to Beastly Kingdom even after the concept was obviously taken out back. To this day, the park's logo and ticket booth still features a dragon that has absolutely nothing to do with anything inside in the park.
That crap should of been erased a long, long time ago, and now they'll have to do the same with the dinosaur references.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
Those temples don’t really look the same.
The only similarity they share is that they’re both temples.
The only way we get to Pandora is interstellar travel. That is definitely the future. And the land and attractions take place after Avatar 5.
I'm not sure where this idea of being grounded and in the present comes from. ITtBaB shrinks us down to interact with talking insects. The Yeti isn't real. DINOSAUR has futuristic time travel tech to send us back in the past. Fish and lions sing to us. The tree of life puts on a show of animal spirits. And Beastly Kingdom was once part of the plans for DAK.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Late reply, turned out what I was told about the previous Moana/Zootopia Dinoland overhaul being canned was accurate at least. I didn't know they'd moved Zootopia over to ITTBAB (probably because it sounds like something they cobbled together quickly and cheaply), or that they replaced the Dinoland overhaul with yet another blue sky plan. But the Dinoland plan still sounds like it's far from set in stone.
For anyone else here who might have information that I lack, what makes people think they'll actually go through with this particular plan this time? One year ago it was an entirely different concept. And they were every bit as vague and non-committal about this current iteration as last year's. Arguably even moreso. I'm fairly certain none of this Dinoland content has been given the green light, hence why they're still unwilling to speak decisively.
At the moment, I strongly doubt anyone at Disney currently knows for sure what will actually get built there, if anything. Unless I hear otherwise from someone trustworthy.
For anyone else here who might have information that I lack, what makes people think they'll actually go through with this particular plan this time? One year ago it was an entirely different concept. And they were every bit as vague and non-committal about this current iteration as last year's. Arguably even moreso. I'm fairly certain none of this Dinoland content has been given the green light, hence why they're still unwilling to speak decisively.
At the moment, I strongly doubt anyone at Disney currently knows for sure what will actually get built there, if anything. Unless I hear otherwise from someone trustworthy.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
I guess it's not at all surprising, but it's a little disappointing to see all the sites reporting this as an "announcement", when they made it clear that this is still blue sky planning and may or may not actually happen.