News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom

yensidtlaw1969

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
britain said:
Anyone who thinks a villains land would be great is akin to someone saying a park with nothing but E-tickets would be great. It’s well intentioned, but short sighted, and doesn’t deeply understand the balance of what makes a pleasant day at the parks.

Not that there aren’t plenty of places Disney has already built that break that balance.
Click to expand...
Depends on how much you know about what they have in mind, I suppose.
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
PREMiERdrum said:
Coco E-ticket is the leading contender for BBTM phase 1, likely utilizing the Soarin' 2.0 ride system.

AFAIK. YMMV.
Click to expand...

Have you heard of a Coco ride for DCA? Now that you’re saying it’s Soarin 2.0 for MK Im hoping they don’t clone it and shoehorn into Grizzly Peak Airfield. I was hoping for more of Shanghai Peter Pan version of a Coco ride.
 
J

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
DisneyDodo said:
3. I know you were originally skeptical that there was any connection between the BBTM and TA projects, but I can’t believe you’re doubling down on that after seeing that Disney confirmed that Coco will be featured in the latter. It’s true that the themes of the two lands aren’t the same (one was focused on the culture, and the other, at least in theory, will lean more into the flora and fauna), but they are set in the same location (± the Yucatán). While I’m sure Disney won’t explicitly refer to the village in TA as “Santa Cecilia,” that was undoubtedly a major part of the inspiration for it. Sorry, I’m not buying that every village in the western hemisphere south of the U.S. features a carousel, papel Picado, and the exact same fountain. WDI would not have taken all of their design ideas for Santa Cecilia and used them in DAK only to still build Santa Cecilia in MK.
Click to expand...
Totally get where you’re coming from on the other points, and thanks for the clarification. On this one, I still disagree that one should necessarily deeply affect the other. The EPCOT Mexico pavilion having a courtyard fountain, Spanish tile roofs, a step pyramid, and papel picado is not preventing Animal Kingdom from getting any of that, so I am not sure why that would be off limits for Magic Kingdom. I don’t think they’ll use the exact same plaza design as in the blue sky artwork since that was conceived when the area was larger and included Encanto, but I don’t see why some sort of Mexican village element would be out of the question as the main path through the area, nor do I feel that it would be that difficult to substantially differentiate a more arid north Mexican village from a tropical American village.
 
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
Ichabod Crane said:
Exactly how is a villains land “short sighted”?
Click to expand...

Villains are what make the regular “Hero” attractions great. Attractions with nothing but baddies would be boring. One-note.

Not to mention very contrived. None of these characters know each other! If you squint, you can kind of tolerate occasions where all the princesses are together. But villains are sociopaths, Ursula does not “pal around” with ANYONE. Nor does Maleficent. Nor does Jafar. Nor does Hook. Nor does Cruella DeVille.

It’s not driven by story. It smells like a marketing initiative, which is all it is.

“We just gotta have a place to sell our Disney VillainsTM sweatershirts, and Hades and Governor Ratigan plushies!” And fans fall for it.

I know times have changed a lot since Walt said, “no the haunted mansion should be pretty on the outside.” But a whole land selling darkness?
 
Teddybearre

Teddybearre

Active Member
britain said:
Villains are what make the regular “Hero” attractions great. Attractions with nothing but baddies would be boring. One-note.

Not to mention very contrived. None of these characters know each other! If you squint, you can kind of tolerate occasions where all the princesses are together. But villains are sociopaths, Ursula does not “pal around” with ANYONE. Nor does Maleficent. Nor does Jafar. Nor does Hook. Nor does Cruella DeVille.

It’s not driven by story. It smells like a marketing initiative, which is all it is.
Click to expand...
With this logic we should close Haunted Mansion and Tower of Terror since the main characters of those rides are “sociopaths” too lmao. I don’t get why so many people use the “Villains are bad so nobody would like them” argument, because if that was true, they would be nowhere near as popular as they are today. If the fact that the villains act like villains makes you so personally riled up, then you must be fun at parties lol

Also who says that Disney wouldn’t just create a story of how the Villains work with each other. I mean…they already have. House of Mouse, Villains After Hours, character interactions, etc.
 
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
Teddybearre said:
With this logic we should close Haunted Mansion and Tower of Terror since the main characters of those rides are “sociopaths” too lmao. I don’t get why so many people use the “Villains are bad so nobody would like them” argument, because if that was true, they would be nowhere near as popular as they are today. If the fact that the villains act like villains makes you so personally riled up, then you must be fun at parties lol

Also who says that Disney wouldn’t just create a story of how the Villains work with each other. I mean…they already have. House of Mouse, Villains After Hours, character interactions, etc.
Click to expand...

They are popular because they perform an essential part of basic mythic storytelling. It is cathartic to see heroes overcome villains. And villains are an entertaining mirror to hold up and see the flaws in ourselves.

But acres devoted to the sort of thing that makes a funny joke on house of mouse is, as I said, shortsighted.
 
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
MouseEarsMom33 said:
Villains land does not have to be the same as scary. Descendants is a popular franchise around villains that kids love. Snow White dining at Artist Pointe has the Queen as the main character interaction. There are plenty of kids there.
Click to expand...
Oh I totally doubt it would be scary. It will just be eye rollingly painful for anyone who actually appreciates the myths and legends that the villains came from.

It’s as true to the characters as Rogers: The Musical is to the Avengers.
 
Last edited:
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
Let me put it another way, I think Universal’s monsters land will be very successful, because a little gloomy Bavarian Village where the Wolfman, Frankenstein, and Dracula will terrorize people is true to their original stories. But none of the most famous Disney villains have a land of their own and a league of comrades.

“Disney Villains” isn’t really a thing. It’s a marketing push.
 
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
Let’s put it yet another way: C-3PO does not pal around with Mickey Mouse. Sure, you can have them in a silly TV commercial together. But you DO NOT have Jedi Mickey show up in Star Tours.

You may say, but they aren’t under the same brand. But you can’t say that all the movies under the Disney animation label happened in the same universe. Bowler Hat Man and Scar aren’t friends.

Now, that was an extreme example. Sure, some may be a better fit than others (Hook and Prince Hans? Ursula and Hades?) But in that case make the land a Theives Port? Or the Underworld? Unfortunately that will probably be too restrictive for Marketing’s desire to put “Disney Villains” stuff in the shops.
 
PREMiERdrum

PREMiERdrum

Well-Known Member
On Frontierland and BBTM:

As currently executed, FL is by far the most restrictive of the four "big" MK lands. With a relatively minor tweak of style and storytelling, this area could be recast as a celebration of the natural beauty and ethos of this region. By focusing on a more natural setting for BBTM, you can help preserve the heart and vibe of FL.

On Villiand Land / Dark Kingdom:

There is without a doubt great concept work happening here. My biggest hesitation is that - no matter what they're able to fund and deliver - this project will struggle to live up to expectations, as it's taken on a mythos of it's own. I'll happily be proven wrong, but I see some of these concepts making it to a DHS expansion - perhaps one with a transportative device that allows it to be fully indoors.
 
DisneyDodo

DisneyDodo

Well-Known Member
While there are certainly children who would refuse to step foot in a Villains-themed land, I don’t anticipate it would be anywhere near the majority. In fact, I expect this land would have attractions that would be much more accessible to young children than many other attractions at MK (not to mention DHS and DAK).

Even princess rides like TBA, 7DMT, and probably whatever they end up building for Moana, are inaccessible to many young kids, who either can’t (due to height restrictions) or won’t ride. Compare that to HM, MNSSHP, or, say, an Ursula spinner, spooky-themed experiences that many kids do/would love.

I think the demographic that would be most let down by a Villians land would be childless adults who have been clamoring for a villians-themed land (or park) that will genuinely scare them. I’m quite confident in predicting that Disney wouldn’t build something of that nature.
 
Consumer

Consumer

Well-Known Member
PREMiERdrum said:
On Frontierland and BBTM:

As currently executed, FL is by far the most restrictive of the four "big" MK lands. It's central source material - a romanticized and whitewashed fairytale of our nation's westward expansion - is inherently problematic. With a relatively minor tweak of style and storytelling, this area could be recast as a celebration of the natural beauty and ethos of this region. By focusing on a more natural setting for BBTM, you can help preserve the heart and vibe of FL.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with a fairy tale depiction of the Wild West, unless you also take issue with fairy tale depictions of the African jungle (where all the warlords?), turn-of-the-century America (where is all the eugenics?), Colonial America (where are all the slaves?), or the future (where is the nuclear holocaust?).
 
SirLink

SirLink

Well-Known Member
britain said:
Let me put it another way, I think Universal’s monsters land will be very successful, because a little gloomy Bavarian Village where the Wolfman, Frankenstein, and Dracula will terrorize people is true to their original stories. But none of the most famous Disney villains have a land of their own and a league of comrades.

“Disney Villains” isn’t really a thing. It’s a marketing push.
Click to expand...

Not quite some of those from some of the monster movies you have mentioned are in fact the hero's in the EU land . But in any case Frankentein wouldn't be chasing you even if that wasn't the case it would be Frankenstein's monster.

Centering a land around Villains allows WDI to be some what creative rather than doing another *yawn* book report the ride based on the latest animated feature.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom