It actually is a great fit considering the family friendly appeal and the rockwork transitioning well from Big Thunder Mountain. Especially if the rockwork creates a stunning backdrop for Big Thunder. Wouldn't that fit in better than the current Florida swampland and greenery surrounding that Frontier landscape? Sounds more thematically consistent to me.
No. Because race cars. It’s not hard to understand why it doesn’t work.
" Because race cars" isn't a valid justification for denying an expansion. You could say Tron doesn't fit into Magic Kingdom by saying "because electric motorcycles." Cars also goes beyond the idea of racing. A huge part of it is the Americana Route 66 desert culture.
There's also a thing called modifying an existing ride and improving upon the technology to accommodate those circumstances. Disney would find a way to make it work, whether it be an indoor version or come up with a new ride system that can accommodate the rain. Whether it is questionable or not, this point stands for anything they put back there to accommodate Florida.
It is an expansion that is meant to stand next to Frontierland. Part of the theme is the time period (which is broad but definitely not broad enough to cover modern race cars even when taken to its farthest extreme). Your justification is literally just “nice rockwork could look cool next to Big Thunder”.
I literally mentioned Route 66 American Car Culture too. Also maybe the Desert Land rumor is true and that certainly would be broad enough to justify Mounument Valley in the Magic Kingdom.
...um, no, it would not. The unique experiences are what draw most guests into (wanting to) expand(ing) their horizons, and chances are higher that they would already be satisfied with having [X] in their local resort than they would be seeking it out elsewhere.
In terms of visual style it would fit in MK, but as a concept/theme it is terrible. Talking cars? Modern times? Single IP land? Doesn’t really work.
I'm new but have been reading these threads for nine years at this point. I'm more so talking about the overall majority general reaction. I was reading WDWMagic forums and many others that hardly complained of the cloning of Galaxy's Edge. More people were happy and applauded Disney that Galaxy's Edge was being brought to both coasts, and the 2015 D23 reaction proves so when Iger announced "We are building two." And those are hard-core fans. And to this day, I don't see much complaints going around.
3 of the castle parks already have single IP lands. So I don’t think they really intend to keep that concept out of MK and not make it 4.
The biggest difference IMHO is that WDW has the overall space - and a perfect park - to not have to do that at MK. I’m not even as hard core as some but it would just seem shortsighted to do something like Cars Land at MK where it would stick out.
Then it’s not even frontierland anymore
Let me rephrase and remove never.. my point was to me current Magic Kingdom doesn't have the splendor that a Disneyland park has. My opinion
Exactly
, it was ignored because at the time everyone hyped it would be an iconic more classic Star Wars and with Avatar been a phenomenon all hype was it would be a win win!
What I can't grab hold is everyone is all about it can't, it's the same ride system, but what about ROR, MRR, and Ratatouille! Plus several other same ride systems different themed IP or attraction story.
