MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

Raineman

Well-Known Member
That is not true.

Disney Parks exist because Walt wanted to create a park where young and old people could enjoy the attractions together instead of one watching the other.

Walt then created a park that showcased the idealized vision of America his generation was nostalgic for. Trains being one of those items.

As time goes on fewer and fewer people are going to be nostalgic for the same things someone who came of age in the 1900s was.

Sure the internet can keep some of those ideas alive but they just won’t hit future generations the same way as something they actually lived through! A riverboat is not going to hit me in the feels the same way walking through the Mushroom Kingdom or touching a X-Wing does, it’s just not. And that’s not something anyone will need to apologize for or feel bad about.
How would you react if, in a couple of decades, the Mushroom Kingdom does not hit with the newer generations, and they rip it out and replace it with something newer that does not give you the same feels? Can you honestly say that you will be OK with that and welcome the replacement?
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
Disney Parks exist because Walt wanted to create a park where young and old people could enjoy the attractions together instead of one watching the other.
So there’s 2 stories - there is the carousel story. And then there are the trains. Both are true.

The original concept for Disneyland grew from Walt’s Backyard Railway and the earliest of concepts were almost identical to the Henry Ford Greenfiled Village which Walt visited multiple times, including a visit with Ward Kimball, legendary animator and imagineer and fellow steam train enthusiast.

I would say Disneyland as a whole started with the Lilly Belle and that Fantasyland with the carousel and classic amusement park rides was inspired by Walt’s visits to Griffith Park.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
All we can do is wait the 3 to 5 years and see what happens.
Well, you know I've been hounding you about the timeframe. And so, I thank you for limiting your future timeline to the 5 year plan announced at D23 last year.

But, that was last year. The clock is ticking.

For Josh to be correct, we're now looking at completion within 4 years.

:)
 

Gusey

Well-Known Member
How would you react if, in a couple of decades, the Mushroom Kingdom does not hit with the newer generations, and they rip it out and replace it with something newer that does not give you the same feels? Can you honestly say that you will be OK with that and welcome the replacement?
I'd like to think that whilst I'd be sad, I wouldn't begin spouting extreme claims that the parks are losing their soles and are dying because they're removing a ride I like. Probably the closest example for my generation is the closure of Dinosaur and Dinoland. I'm going to miss Dinosaur when it closes because it was one of the first non-coaster thrill rides I did, but understand why it's closing and am looking forward to seeing what they end up doing with Tropical Americas. Similarly, I'm looking forward to what they do with Piston Peak and Villains Land, and feel like ultimately it will be a better use of the land than an TSI, RoA and Liberty Belle ended up being in the last few years of its operation.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
How would you react if, in a couple of decades, the Mushroom Kingdom does not hit with the newer generations, and they rip it out and replace it with something newer that does not give you the same feels? Can you honestly say that you will be OK with that and welcome the replacement?
That’s kind of how life works. Would you expect them to ignore their new customer base to make you happy?
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Why is Disney so bad at space?

Lazy has touched on this and I’ll freely admit I lack the language or expertise to fully articulate it, but the one thing Disney seemingly cannot do in Florida anymore is layout spaces. TSL is an atrocity, perhaps the worst arranged land in Disney history. SWL often feels so lifeless and empty, less then the sum of its parts. The EPCOT core makeover is a mess, a directionless mass of concrete and unimpressive landscaping that adds up to nothing. Avatar Land is a decorated warehouse and courtyard and feels like it.

Compare all this to the open vistas and intricately delineated space of the Frontierland Disney is mangling. Or, for a more recent example, look at the layout of AK, particularly the almost cinematic way the Tree of Life is revealed.

Epic Universe has its issues in this area, most notably the thoughtless placement of the Werewolf Coaster ruining the design of Monsters or the sense of emptiness in part of Potter created by the absence of the scrapped attraction, but the park generally excels at impressive reveals and a sense of color and life.

Why can’t Disney arrange space?
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
The reckless priorities of the company that they feel they need a Cars attraction warrants this effort, would be the third clue the revenue remains still significant.

Since Cars Land opened in DCA in 2012 there have been rumours for more Cars attractions in the parks, but to my knowledge the only things built were the Lightning McQueen show at DHS and the rebrand of the WDSP tram tour.

That it has taken this long to build a substantial, new Cars ride suggests to me the idea of a new scenic ride in Frontierland came first and then the Cars connection was used after to justify it to upper management.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
I'd like to think that whilst I'd be sad, I wouldn't begin spouting extreme claims that the parks are losing their soles and are dying because they're removing a ride I like. Probably the closest example for my generation is the closure of Dinosaur and Dinoland. I'm going to miss Dinosaur when it closes because it was one of the first non-coaster thrill rides I did, but understand why it's closing and am looking forward to seeing what they end up doing with Tropical Americas. Similarly, I'm looking forward to what they do with Piston Peak and Villains Land, and feel like ultimately it will be a better use of the land than an TSI, RoA and Liberty Belle ended up being in the last few years of its operation.
Do you consider the parks to be historically or culturally significant? Do you consider them works of art?
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Why is Disney so bad at space?

Lazy has touched on this and I’ll freely admit I lack the language or expertise to fully articulate it, but the one thing Disney seemingly cannot do in Florida anymore is layout spaces. TSL is an atrocity, perhaps the worst arranged land in Disney history. SWL often feels so lifeless and empty, less then the sum of its parts. The EPCOT core makeover is a mess, a directionless mass of concrete and unimpressive landscaping that adds up to nothing. Avatar Land is a decorated warehouse and courtyard and feels like it.

Compare all this to the open vistas and intricately delineated space of the Frontierland Disney is mangling. Or, for a more recent example, look at the layout of AK, particularly the almost cinematic way the Tree of Life is revealed.

Epic Universe has its issues in this area, most notably the thoughtless placement of the Werewolf Coaster ruining the design of Monsters or the sense of emptiness in part of Potter created by the absence of the scrapped attraction, but the park generally excels at impressive reveals and a sense of color and life.

Why can’t Disney arrange space?

What happened to the Disney of just a few years ago that figured out how to tack on an Islands of Adventure-style park to Disney Studios Paris complete with a large lake and backstage marina separated by a swing bridge?

The long sidewalk to get there and single ride IP lands leave something to be desired, but they got the basics down.
 

Raineman

Well-Known Member
I'd like to think that whilst I'd be sad, I wouldn't begin spouting extreme claims that the parks are losing their soles and are dying because they're removing a ride I like. Probably the closest example for my generation is the closure of Dinosaur and Dinoland. I'm going to miss Dinosaur when it closes because it was one of the first non-coaster thrill rides I did, but understand why it's closing and am looking forward to seeing what they end up doing with Tropical Americas. Similarly, I'm looking forward to what they do with Piston Peak and Villains Land, and feel like ultimately it will be a better use of the land than an TSI, RoA and Liberty Belle ended up being in the last few years of its operation.
For the record, I have never said that the parks are gonna die because they are removing an attraction I like. Believe it or not, I understand why Disney is doing this, from their point of view. I know the average park guest is applauding this change, and that's who Disney needs to cater to, to keep making money. I get it. But, that doesn't mean I have to like it, or look forward to what comes next. It's almost like there's this dismissive mindset running through this thread that "the changes are coming, they're gonna be better, and you're just gonna have to swallow it, and we don't care how emotionally invested you were in what is getting removed and you're wrong for not waiting to embrace the change". We've all seen the concept art, we know the IP that this new area will be based on, and based on that, some of us can confidently say that there is no way we will like the new attractions better than we like ROA/TSI, and that seems to annoy some people here. And, I would also like to add that, personally, making this change in itself is not totally disagreeable-it's what they are replacing it with. If they took the Cars IP completely out of the equation, and just had this as the Pacific Northwest wilderness with an offroad ride through it, I would be ok with that. Anyway, rant over.
 

Raineman

Well-Known Member
That’s kind of how life works. Would you expect them to ignore their new customer base to make you happy?
I know that's how life works. But your comment does not address my question-would people that agree with the changes they are making still feel the same way if a change was made to something they are emotionally attached to in the parks?. It's easy to say "I'll always look forward to new things in the parks" when the things that are being replaced are not things that you like. And they don't have to make me happy, because I most likely won't ever be attending any of their theme parks again.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
It's almost like there's this dismissive mindset running through this thread that "the changes are coming, they're gonna be better, and you're just gonna have to swallow it, and we don't care how emotionally invested you were in what is getting removed and you're wrong for not waiting to embrace the change".
Yeah - that’s the part that makes me annoyed as well. Some even seem to hint that there is nothing worthwhile to the old Disney parks - and that soon nostalgia will be dead just like Walt and then we can have the parks that the “general public” want. That nostalgia is somehow holding things back.

I go to Disney parks because I like them, not because I hope they pave them over and build something new. Haha
 

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

Back
Top Bottom