I haven't been to Magic Kingdom in a while but I watch POV videos regularly, and when I see Adventureland at Magic Kingdom I just get a swell of sadness. What a wasted land. As the camera walks from the 1970s Southern California shopping center aesthetic of the area around Pirates of the Caribbean (stucco-check! tile roofs-check. We're done!) to the tackiness that is Aladdin plopped next to the Tiki Room to the tropical-colonial facades (a good idea in 1970, not so much today) heading toward the hub -- an absolutely "dead" area devoid of any creative or conceptual energy -- I can't help but thinking "what is going on here?"
Over at Disneyland, Adventureland has been given a distinctive 1930s adventure vibe, thanks to Indiana Jones and a fabulous Jungle Cruise queue building which is about 30 years old but stands as a pinnacle of Disney thematic place-making. The land is tight and crowded, but packs a thematic punch -- it has a point of view, a story to tell, immersion to offer.
But the Magic Kingdom's Adventureland is lacking a theme, a story, a point of view. They have all the "bones" they need in the structures, but they're not doing anything with any of it. In that tropical-colonial stretch, corrugated roofs which could be rusty and ramshackle and patched up from too-many hurricanes (story!) are just painted flat brown. Opportunities for visual gags unexploited. Blank stucco walls that could have vintage advertising for products, the Jungle Cruise Navigation Co., (or anything!) are as blank as they've been in decades. Nothing looks distressed enough to be thematically intentional, yet it's also not spit-shine clean as Main Street. It just looks neglected.
If the land is a port-of-call on a river, where are the barrels, crates, nets, and evidence that this is the crossroads of trade and tropical commerce? Where is the evidence of any inhabitants? Who are they, why do they live here, what do they do?
Apparently Disney has nothing to say. No stories to tell. No ambition of how they want guests to feel or what era they want guests to imagine they're in. There's nothing that surprises, nothing to make guests smile, no plussing of any sort.
What do I suggest? Well, as Animal Kingdom now offers rich thematic immersion into several global locales, the original purpose of Adventureland is quaint but dated. That 1970s colonialism stuff was meant to be "realistic" and "authentic" back then but in comparison to Animal Kingdom, it can't compete today. So with Adventureland they should go for whimsy and playfulness and humor instead.
For one, since Animal Kingdom takes place in modern day, Adventureland should transport us to another specific era. Whereas Disneyland's Adventureland has a 1930s vibe, I think Magic Kingdom's should go for its own unique feel based on the 1950s. In this era, global air travel was opening up and "exotic" destinations were being visited by "Western" tourists. But it was also an era of pulp novels and comic books, B-movies, evocative travel posters and travelogue magazines. What if the inhabitants of this port town played up the "adventure" for their gullible guests...the excitement they could have, the creatures they could encounter, in a way that flips the power-balance. (The original colonialism of Adventureland was a story of...western colonialism. There was no sense of empowerment offered to the inhabitants, no respect or recognition, they were invisible.)
The walk through Adventureland at Magic Kingdom could be funny, it could poke humor at globe-trotting western tourists, (the Jungle Cruise and Tiki Room are both humorous...this would make sense). There could be colorful signs, advertising with over-the-top promises, even streetmosphere and characters that engage the "gullible tourists" and fulfill their silly expectations (a snake charmer, a healer...the key is that the locales are in on the joke, the tourists are "the mark"). In addition to the barrels, crates, nets and other cargo-related props, there could be stacks of tourist suitcases outside a Hotel...imagine the humor in the excess (oversized trunks, hat boxes). There could be ticket booths and wheeled vehicles offering "comfortable rides" and prop-filled cafes offering rejuvenating beverages promising health and wellness.
Adventureland could be detailed, alive, and funny!
Over at Disneyland, Adventureland has been given a distinctive 1930s adventure vibe, thanks to Indiana Jones and a fabulous Jungle Cruise queue building which is about 30 years old but stands as a pinnacle of Disney thematic place-making. The land is tight and crowded, but packs a thematic punch -- it has a point of view, a story to tell, immersion to offer.
But the Magic Kingdom's Adventureland is lacking a theme, a story, a point of view. They have all the "bones" they need in the structures, but they're not doing anything with any of it. In that tropical-colonial stretch, corrugated roofs which could be rusty and ramshackle and patched up from too-many hurricanes (story!) are just painted flat brown. Opportunities for visual gags unexploited. Blank stucco walls that could have vintage advertising for products, the Jungle Cruise Navigation Co., (or anything!) are as blank as they've been in decades. Nothing looks distressed enough to be thematically intentional, yet it's also not spit-shine clean as Main Street. It just looks neglected.
If the land is a port-of-call on a river, where are the barrels, crates, nets, and evidence that this is the crossroads of trade and tropical commerce? Where is the evidence of any inhabitants? Who are they, why do they live here, what do they do?
Apparently Disney has nothing to say. No stories to tell. No ambition of how they want guests to feel or what era they want guests to imagine they're in. There's nothing that surprises, nothing to make guests smile, no plussing of any sort.
What do I suggest? Well, as Animal Kingdom now offers rich thematic immersion into several global locales, the original purpose of Adventureland is quaint but dated. That 1970s colonialism stuff was meant to be "realistic" and "authentic" back then but in comparison to Animal Kingdom, it can't compete today. So with Adventureland they should go for whimsy and playfulness and humor instead.
For one, since Animal Kingdom takes place in modern day, Adventureland should transport us to another specific era. Whereas Disneyland's Adventureland has a 1930s vibe, I think Magic Kingdom's should go for its own unique feel based on the 1950s. In this era, global air travel was opening up and "exotic" destinations were being visited by "Western" tourists. But it was also an era of pulp novels and comic books, B-movies, evocative travel posters and travelogue magazines. What if the inhabitants of this port town played up the "adventure" for their gullible guests...the excitement they could have, the creatures they could encounter, in a way that flips the power-balance. (The original colonialism of Adventureland was a story of...western colonialism. There was no sense of empowerment offered to the inhabitants, no respect or recognition, they were invisible.)
The walk through Adventureland at Magic Kingdom could be funny, it could poke humor at globe-trotting western tourists, (the Jungle Cruise and Tiki Room are both humorous...this would make sense). There could be colorful signs, advertising with over-the-top promises, even streetmosphere and characters that engage the "gullible tourists" and fulfill their silly expectations (a snake charmer, a healer...the key is that the locales are in on the joke, the tourists are "the mark"). In addition to the barrels, crates, nets and other cargo-related props, there could be stacks of tourist suitcases outside a Hotel...imagine the humor in the excess (oversized trunks, hat boxes). There could be ticket booths and wheeled vehicles offering "comfortable rides" and prop-filled cafes offering rejuvenating beverages promising health and wellness.
Adventureland could be detailed, alive, and funny!
Last edited:
