MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Disstevefan1]

Definitely will come down to final execution - info think it any project will keep the scope/get extra budget if needed it will be this one as more than any other they have to get this one as right as possible and is basically Josh's legacy

Lets hope they get this right.

Not so sure about any extra budget as it seems they scope cut more times than they expand budgets when it comes to theme parks.

As for Josh's legacy, the will be appointed CEO LONG BEFORE Cars land opens and he will have many years to work on his legacy.

 

[Dreamer19]

Hard to say really what he would and would not do. What's not hard to say is that I wouldn't do this.

To me it doesn't matter whether or not an attraction has a demand that exceeds its capacity. To an accountant that's the only thing that adds value to an attraction. But not to me.

There are other factors that add value to an attraction. Theme parks needs a balance of attractions and for me anyway, it's actually important that some of them are walk on that really exist more for an atmosphere than a ride count.

Make me thing of a I've heard, "If everything is an emergency then nothing is an emergency" In the theme park world, If you don't have the simple A and B ticket attractions it takes away the value of the D and E attractions.

If everything's a D or E ticket then nothing is.

This move is obviously very controversial. Less controversial would have been a genuine expansion without the elimination of ROA.

Correct.

Once again, this decision is the cheap and easy way to go and the park will be worse off and less memorable for it.

If this ride is absolutely a slam dunk that completely redefines the essence of Disney Parks then I will eat my words.

My feeling, however, is that it will work (mechanically) slightly better than TBA, it will be more popular (since kids like cars), but the park overall will lose most of its charm and uniqueness (in Florida).

 

[DCBaker]

It appears most of the trees have now been cleared in the spot labeled 2 in the bioreconstruct aerial image below:



Area 2 photos:




Clearing has also now begun in the area labeled 3:

 

[HMF]

True. I shall change "WDI" to "Disney."

How about WDM? Walt Disney Marketeeering which is basically what they are now.

 

[easyrowrdw]

What if they are have been trying to do that but we keep complaining and making such a backlash that stuff keeps getting dumbed down into products no one wants?

How so? Do you have an example of what you’re thinking?

 

[phillip9698]

Correct.

Once again, this decision is the cheap and easy way to go and the park will be worse off and less memorable for it.

If this ride is absolutely a slam dunk that completely redefines the essence of Disney Parks then I will eat my words.

My feeling, however, is that it will work (mechanically) slightly better than TBA, it will be more popular (since kids like cars), but the park overall will lose most of its charm and uniqueness (in Florida).

Honest question. Why do so many want just a copy of what’s already in California? Why not MORE truly unique things?

WDW as a whole has so many of just worse versions of what’s in California.

More unique things that don’t already exist in the same country please.

 

[HMF]

Honest question. Why do so many want just a copy of what’s already in California? Why not MORE truly unique things?

WDW as a whole has so many of just worse versions of what’s in California.

More unique things that don’t already exist in the same country please.

Mostly because California tends to get the better things.

 

[Disone]

@phillip9698

I don't think that's it. It's not that they prefer a copy of something already in California, it's not even that they don't want cars Land. I think the popular opinion is they just don't want this new cars Land adventure to be replacing anything. They'd rather have it be a genuine addition.

Mostly because California tends to get the better things.

So true and then some

 

[phillip9698]

Mostly because California tends to get the better things.

Which feeds my overall hypothesis. The people most vocal about things like this are either local or at least within driving distance of Orlando.

Of course local people just want the closest thing they can get to Disneyland because they are local, they can just head there whenever.

But a person who has to fly in, they should want truly unique parks.

 

[Centauri Space Station]

Mostly because California tends to get the better things.

Riiiiiiiight……

 

[HMF]

Riiiiiiiight……View attachment 864607View attachment 864608View attachment 864609View attachment 864610

I won't disagree with those but at least 80% of the time Disneyland gets the superior version. DCA doesn't count because they have basically given up on any consistent theme.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I won't disagree with those but at least 80% of the time Disneyland gets the superior version. DCA doesn't count because they have basically given up on any consistent theme.

No true consistently-themed-land ride...

 

[CoastalElite64]

Which feeds my overall hypothesis. The people most vocal about things like this are either local or at least within driving distance of Orlando.

Of course local people just want the closest thing they can get to Disneyland because they are local, they can just head there whenever.

But a person who has to fly in, they should want truly unique parks.

100%. I want both parks to have unique attractions so my family has the best experience possible when we visit both parks.

 

[JackCH]

I think the vast majority of people will only visit one resort or the other, as such I am fine with cloning. My ideal would be that each park needs at least one signature land or group of attractions that are unique to it. To me, Carsland works as the signature for DCA and so I would rather it not be cloned. But other standalone attractions and stuff is fine.

 

[Centauri Space Station]

I think the vast majority of people will only visit one resort or the other, as such I am fine with cloning. My ideal would be that each park needs at least one signature land or group of attractions that are unique to it. To me, Carsland works as the signature for DCA and so I would rather it not be cloned. But other standalone attractions and stuff is fine.

Yes i also think SWGE works better at dhs over DLG

 

[JackCH]

Yes i also think SWGE works better at dhs over DLG

Oh yes. I would much rather have that space be for Villains at MK than SWGE, which fits much better at DHS.

But, I've said for a while I am overall okay with the Cars/Villains project as it finally starts to set MK apart from the other castle parks.

 

[CoastalElite64]

I think the vast majority of people will only visit one resort or the other, as such I am fine with cloning. My ideal would be that each park needs at least one signature land or group of attractions that are unique to it. To me, Carsland works as the signature for DCA and so I would rather it not be cloned. But other standalone attractions and stuff is fine.

For the general audience I agree. But for super fans that spend time on fan sites and learning Disney history I think they should visit both parks. But thats more worth it when there are more unique offerings.

 

[JackCH]

For the general audience I agree. But for super fans that spend time on fan sites and learning Disney history I think they should visit both parks. But thats more worth it when there are more unique offerings.

I agree to an extent (hence why I think there should be at least 1 signature thing unique to each park), but at the same time I consider myself a superfan, but I'm not sure if I'lll ever get to DL again (I went once as a kid)... I want to (very badly), but budget-wise as a teacher it is very hard to do and even harder to justify when WDW is an hour and a half away. And it seems like it is better if you are developing an incredible attraction or land to allow a much wider net of your audience get to experience it, rather than limit it to the relatively small percentage who will go to both.

That being said it seems they are moving away from cloning anyway.

 

[Chester&Hester Enthusiast]

IP is the catch-all term for Disney branded stuffs, characters, movies, etc. Welcome to the forum! Though like college football teams, you have to pick a side now. It's the rules. Pro or against? You can't switch later. Keep in mind that whatever you choose, will alienate at least 50% right off the bat. No pressure.

So what's your thoughts on the Piston Peak Cars-themed area?

Imagine looking at life with absolutely no nuance. If IP is used, we want it to make sense. This doesn't seem at all difficult to grasp, but here we constantly are.

I'm in the camp that the constraint of only being allowed to design backwards from pre-selected film IP is hindering WDI creatively, but I also believe that IP can certainly be used effectively if it feels organic. Much of what they've produced lately doesn't feel organic to me.

 

[DisneyHead123]

I'm in the camp that the constant use of IP is hindering WDI creatively, but that IP can certainly be used effectively if it feels organic. Much of what they've produced lately doesn't feel organic to me.

I’ve said before, one thing I find interesting is the approach to IP in the parks vs. the resorts. To me it indicates that Disney has to see both sides of the issue in some sense, even if “seeing both sides” at an institutional level might mean having two groups of designers who aren’t in communication with each other but all work for Disney.

Whatever arguments could be made for shoehorning IP into the parks could also be made at the resorts. People come here expecting to see Disney, merch sales, drawing in crowds, etc. And yet at the resort level (and the most bougie cruise suites) they must see the counter arguments. Some would say a little too well, as the resorts have been accused of being too far towards the other extreme.

I am a fan of intensive theming, but I do want it to fit. I hope Disney maybe pauses to consider what their fan base is buying up when it comes to DVC. Riviera is an idealized, vague version of Europe (I guess France, technically, although it seems to borrow from other parts of Europe.) The Poly Tower is the soft watercolor version of being somewhere unspecified in the North or South Pacific. They could have made the Riviera “Belle’s Chateau” and the Poly Tower “Moana’s Paradise” or something, but they went pretty far in the other direction. Whatever their rationale was there, I hope they find a middle ground with the parks (and the resorts). Theming is essential and part of what makes Disney Disney. But theming should transport people to someplace that they really want to be. That doesn’t necessarily mean an idealized fairy tale (although it might) - the OG Animal Kingdom was successful in its commitment to realism because it was presented in a way that captured people’s imagination. But it does mean the place in question needs serious atmospheric charm. IP is great, but it doesn’t necessarily represent a world we all wish we could be transported to.