MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[WorldExplorer]

They're not going to dock the riverboat because they don't want the riverboat anymore.

Like how they're not keeping the river because they don't want the river anymore.

Or how they're not moving Muppet Vision because they don't want Muppet Vision anymore.

They don't care. Everything makes more sense from that perspective.

 

[𝐌𝖆𝖓 𝖎𝖓 𝐖𝖊𝖇]

They're not going to dock the riverboat because they don't want the riverboat anymore.

Right, but what kind of discussion is that!? Why don't the want the riverboat? Could they not find a use (besides decoration) to use the riverboat for a functional purpose. A M&G, a QS stand, etc. Seems a waste to scrap it.

 

[Disstevefan1]

They're not going to dock the riverboat because they don't want the riverboat anymore.

Like how they're not keeping the river because they don't want the river anymore.

Or how they're not moving Muppet Vision because they don't want Muppet Vision anymore.

They don't care. Everything makes more sense from that perspective.

Nominee for the best post of 2025

 

[𝐌𝖆𝖓 𝖎𝖓 𝐖𝖊𝖇]

Nominee for the best post of 2025

How did you get off Ignore!? Oops. Back, back, over the falls!

 

[WorldExplorer]

Right, but what kind of discussion is that!? Why don't the want the riverboat? Could they not find a use (besides decoration) to use the riverboat for a functional purpose. A M&G, a QS stand, etc. Seems a waste to scrap it.

You feel that way because you care about the riverboat. The fans care about and so feel they should go out of their way to try and reuse it and that they need to have a reason to not keep it.

They do not feel the same way: since they place no importance on the riverboat, it's a simple matter of removing the river, so removing the thing that uses the river. It's not that they specifically have something against the riverboat (I mean, I don't know nowadays it's possible they do, but so far as I know), it's that ditching the stuff from the area you're scrapping is normal.

They can make snack stands or meet and greets (they probably won't do that one) out of much simpler buildings that are easier to maintain.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Right, but what kind of discussion is that!? Why don't the want the riverboat? Could they not find a use (besides decoration) to use the riverboat for a functional purpose. A M&G, a QS stand, etc. Seems a waste to scrap it.

Just my opinion, I think "todays Disney" sees the riverboat as just a cost with no ROI.

 

[Bocabear]

The Riverboat docked over by the Tom Sawyer rafts and used as a three storey snack stand with seating, while sad because it is not in service, would at the least, still be charming...a lovely place to sit with your ice cream or snack while you enjoy the vistas of the spectacular water features and rockwork ...and add a beautiful set piece to what is left of the water there.....

 

[𝐌𝖆𝖓 𝖎𝖓 𝐖𝖊𝖇]

The Riverboat docked over by the Tom Sawyer rafts and used as a three storey snack stand with seating, while sad because it is not in service, would at the least, still be charming...a lovely place to sit with your ice cream or snack while you enjoy the vistas of the spectacular water features and rockwork ...and add a beautiful set piece to what is left of the water there.....

Exactly.

 

[doctornick]

The Riverboat docked over by the Tom Sawyer rafts and used as a three storey snack stand with seating, while sad because it is not in service, would at the least, still be charming...a lovely place to sit with your ice cream or snack while you enjoy the vistas of the spectacular water features and rockwork ...and add a beautiful set piece to what is left of the water there.....

That's kind of what I'm hoping for and seems like a plausible - even if not likely - outcome. If it is going to be docked, it has to be changed into some sort of direct money generator (food or merch) to justify the presence for the sharp pencil boys.

 

[MR.Dis]

Just came back from WDW and took my last spin around Rivers on the Riverboat. While a nostalgic attraction, it was never a favorite or even an occasional ride that I went on. My best memories of Tom Sawyer Island was when my grandkids were real young and ran around the fort--have not been on the island in over 5 years. So doing something new does not bother me, just do not cheap out. As Walt said the parks will never be finished.

 

[Bocabear]

From what I understand the boat has plumbing...so the possibility of conversion seems feasible....

 

[DavidDL]

I know it would require effort on their end and others have tossed this idea around already, but having the Riverboat parked and utilized in some way around the two Port Orleans hotels would be a nice touch. They already have something similar over at Disney Springs with the Paddlefish restaurant. I see no reason (other than money, of course) that they couldn't do something like that on a much smaller scale at one of those two properties.

 

[donaldtoo]

Just came back from WDW and took my last spin around Rivers on the Riverboat. While a nostalgic attraction, it was never a favorite or even an occasional ride that I went on. My best memories of Tom Sawyer Island was when my grandkids were real young and ran around the fort--have not been on the island in over 5 years. So doing something new does not bother me, just do not cheap out. As Walt said the parks will never be finished.

There’s a difference between “will never be finished” (as in adding stuff), and yanking out existing stuff to replace it with something else.
And, of course, there was supposed to be that whole “blessing of size” thing for expansion.

 

[peter11435]

There’s a difference between “will never be finished” (as in adding stuff), and yanking out existing stuff to replace it with something else.
And, of course, there was supposed to be that whole “blessing of size” thing for expansion.

Blessing of size doesn’t mean that individual parks can just endlessly expand. It also doesn’t mean that aging and unpopular infrastructure shouldn’t be replaced. Walt himself yanked out plenty of existing stuff to replace it with something else.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

Blessing of size doesn’t mean that individual parks can just endlessly expand. It also doesn’t mean that aging and unpopular infrastructure shouldn’t be replaced. Walt himself yanked out plenty of existing stuff to replace it with something else.

Yeah sure, but he wouldn't have done this. If we're pulling the Walt card.

 

[donaldtoo]

Blessing of size doesn’t mean that individual parks can just endlessly expand. It also doesn’t mean that aging and unpopular infrastructure shouldn’t be replaced. Walt himself yanked out plenty of existing stuff to replace it with something else.

Indeed. But, I’d argue that when Walt did it it was definitely “plussed”. To be generous, I, personally, don’t think that’s often the case these days.

 

[Disone]

Blessing of size doesn’t mean that individual parks can just endlessly expand. It also doesn’t mean that aging and unpopular infrastructure shouldn’t be replaced. Walt himself yanked out plenty of existing stuff to replace it with something else.

He yanked out and replaced stuff at Disneyland, but he never had the opportunity to do so at Magic Kingdom where he had that blessing of size that Disneyland did not.

Maybe one can't expand endlessly but compared to Disneyland, even though Magic Kingdom is slightly larger it has significantly less number of attractions. I don't think it would have killed Disney to genuinely add in the case of the Magic Kingdom.

 

[peter11435]

Yeah sure, but he wouldn't have done this. If we're pulling the Walt card.

How do you know what he would have done. He died 60 years ago. There’s no telling what he would have done or if Florida would even have a river if he had lived. We just don’t know.

 

[ManicMillennial]

How do you know what he would have done. He died 60 years ago. There’s no telling what he would have done or if Florida would even have a river if he had lived. We just don’t know.

This is very true! He didn’t even want to do another theme park in Florida he bought all that land to build a self sufficient “city of tomorrow” that probably would have bankrupted the company and left him in ruins if he had lived long enough to build it.

 

[peter11435]

He yanked out and replaced stuff at Disneyland, but he never had the opportunity to do so at Magic Kingdom where he had that blessing of size that Disneyland did not.

Maybe one can't expand endlessly but compared to Disneyland, even though Magic Kingdom is slightly larger it has significantly less number of attractions. I don't think it would have killed Disney to genuinely add in the case of the Magic Kingdom.

He would have still replaced things that were losing favor with the audience.