You're definitely right about the first part - a 5th Gate for WDW really, really is not on the docket, no matter what anyone else wants to believe.They are not going to build a 5th park so the whole ‘beyond thunder mountain’ needs to be the Villians land. They demand and upsells they could get from that would be insane
I'm not sure I am as enthusiastic about the prospect of a villains land as most people, but one thing that makes me root for this proposal over the others that have been mentioned so far is that at least it's not based on a single IP. More than the IP-mandate, it is the construction of entire lands based on single film franchises that I think will end up being the biggest albatross around the parks' neck from the Iger era in the decades to come as those franchises fade in relevance and new IPs emerge that can't be incorporated into lands so specifically focussed on different IPs.You're definitely right about the first part - a 5th Gate for WDW really, really is not on the docket, no matter what anyone else wants to believe.
Personally, I think if they're dead set on expanding the Magic Kingdom (which I *don't* think should be #1 Priority for WDW expansion), a Villains Land is likely the best bet creatively, thematically, experientially, and financially. At least of the "Beyond Big Thunder" pitches I've heard so far.
If nothing else, Halloween is well on its way towards becoming the most lucrative season at WDW. A full, rich, committed Villains Land at Magic Kingdom could really put things over the top there.
I tend to agree. A few of the single-IP lands manage to overcome the issues that seem inherent in dedicating so much space to only one property, but even then most of them are yet untested by time. I don't suspect Galaxy's Edge will make it to its 20th Anniversary without tangible change, ambitious though it is.I'm not sure I am as enthusiastic about the prospect of a villains land as most people, but one thing that makes me root for this proposal over the others that have been mentioned so far is that at least it's not based on a single IP. More than the IP-mandate, it is the construction of entire lands based on single film franchises that I think will end up being the biggest albatross around the parks' neck from the Iger era in the decades to come as those franchises fade in relevance and new IPs emerge that can't be incorporated into lands so specifically focussed on different IPs.
So, if we end up with a villains land at MK and a Tropical Americas land at AK rather than, say, Zootopia Land and Encanto Land, I'll take it!
It sort of depends - I think Toy Story actually has a lot of potential for a land, but none of the Toy Story Lands worldwide actually deliver properly on it. What should have handily been one of the most naturally fun and immersive themed entertainment experiences anywhere instead turned into one that's half-heartedly decorated where the smallest guests wait in the longest lines for the shortest rides.I think single IP lands work if the franchise is big enough. Frozen, Toy Story, Star Wars, Marvel etc. In Florida I don't think there are any left that are worthwhile that they can build since Marvel is off the table. Indiana Jones isn't worthwhile any more in my opinion and Cars is just dated.
And beyond that, were there any memorable locations in the Toy Story movies? a suburban backyard, a kids room, a pizza place and a garbage dump.
Cars had a clear sense of place... They were locations you would want to see.
I think that is the problem with Galaxy's Edge...these are not locations we know, and not from the most memorable and beloved films.... Like having a Cinderella land, but it's really Cinderella's cousin Maude who lives in Serbia... A host of new characters no one cares about in locations that are not recognizable...but they spent millions on rockwork....
If they build new lands for behind the Rivers Of America, they need to be compelling settings...Villains Lair would give them the opportunity to do a huge expansion that would cover many different IPs.
Wicked Queen from Snow White, Maleficent ,Captain Hook ,Ursula , Jafar ,Frollo ,Hades ,Dr Facilier ,Mother Gothel...and more. The settings could be beautiful and epic in scale and a minimum of 3-4 rides... plus shopping and a signature dining location... there is a lot to work with, and it brings relevancy to multiple films instead of just one IP like GE or Toy Story Land....
Agreed. Villains and Toontown get a pass from me because they, like Fantasyland, create (or presumably would create) a homespace for multiple characters and franchises that fall under a particular umbrella and are fun to imagine in a shared space.Apart from "Villains" and Toontown, I hate the idea of single IP lands in castle parks. Galaxy's Edge looks like a growth on top of an otherwise perfect Disneyland park.
Agreed. Villains and Toontown get a pass from me because they, like Fantasyland, create (or presumably would create) a homespace for multiple characters and franchises that fall under a particular umbrella and are fun to imagine in a shared space.
If Fantasyland hadn't set the precedent I would probably feel differently, but since it did and both lands seem conceptually (if not physically) tied to Fantasyland they check out for me as within the scope of the Magic Kingdom concept.
Stumbling upon Zootopia up the road from The Haunted Mansion, however, would not sit well with me.
Having a dozen or so beloved classic films that have already proved their popularity is long lasting (several of which include iconic and potentially wonderful locations) get all shoved into one shared space while something less than a decade old (barely over two years, in Encanto's case) gets an entire landed devoted to it right next to them rubs me the wrong way.
It comes across like bad priorities with a touch of arrogance.
Having a dozen or so beloved classic films that have already proved their popularity is long lasting (several of which include iconic and potentially wonderful locations) get all shoved into one shared space while something less than a decade old (barely over two years, in Encanto's case) gets an entire landed devoted to it right next to them rubs me the wrong way.
It comes across like bad priorities with a touch of arrogance.
Fans at a convention are different from the general public, though. Perhaps they did focus groups and too many moms thought it would scare their 3-year olds? Ironic, since Susie will be 12 before this opens…It's kind of crazy that they got a positive, first hand, in person reaction from their own customers to the idea of a Villain's land in MK and then decided "no, maybe we should build Zootopia instead?"
If he’s that petty, I’d be perfectly happy to have him push Facilier into TBA since it’s one of “his IPs”.Zootopia, the movie, is Bob Iger's Disney (like Coco and Encanto). The ride was originally made for his Magic Kingdom.
Now [if built] his brand of Disney gets to reshape the most popular Disney park for years to come. Just like how Disneyland may have had Star Wars in it for decades, but not the characters from the sequel trilogy made possible by his acquisition.
A land based on animated characters made before he joined the company doesn't.
Fans at a convention are different from the general public, though. Perhaps they did focus groups and too many moms thought it would scare their 3-year olds? Ironic, since Susie will be 12 before this opens…
How about a 70 mph Mickey and the Roadster Racers coaster with 7 inversions? At DAK because Mickey is a mouse.The Halloween Parties and Villains Nights have no trouble selling tickets and Fantasmic! is packed every night.
You'd think by now they know how much their customers like villains. I mean, they even made Maleficent and Cruella movies.
How about a 70 mph Mickey and the Roadster Racers coaster with 7 inversions? At DAK because Mickey is a mouse.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.