MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

Chi84

Premium Member
I’m not sure you get to tell other posters what they are or aren’t emotionally attached to…

Are comics art? Popular films? Video games?

Can any element of the built environment- say, a cathedral - be considered art?

What is your definition of “art?”
Where did I tell other posters what they are or aren't emotionally attached to? I believe I was careful to limit my statements to my own thoughts and experiences. People are different and there's nothing wrong with that.

People can also like things for different reasons. Some are attracted to the nostalgia factor of WDW or perhaps because they consider it art and others (including me) are attracted to it simply because it's a fun vacation spot. Our family has a great time whenever we visit. I just don't think of it in terms of being an art form. If others do, it explains their emotional attachment but I don't feel the same way. I have no idea why you find that staggering.
 

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
Well, to be more specific first major theme park in the US, with international coverage thanks to the TV series leading up to it. Plus, besides Knotts and Efteling, I hadn't heard of the others, and the others are more recently due to an increase interest in theme parks, rather than international coverage
Look, I'm not trying to argue that DL doesn't have historical significance. Disneyland is clearly the most successful (until WDW came along), but historically it was not the first.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
others (including me) are attracted to it simply because it's a fun vacation spot.
What makes it’s a fun vacation spot for you?

(Not sarcasm or a gotcha by the way… genuinely curious. If it’s not the details, live entertainment, etc. what makes Disney better than universal or Dollywood for you? As an example. I’m guessing your kids enjoy the rides?)
 
Last edited:

Charlie The Chatbox Ghost

Well-Known Member
Huh?

The RoA is a concrete lined basin

The entire property was undeveloped swap before they touched it.
I think I had a brain fart there, I was trying to say that whether they build on the rivers or build outside the park, they're still having to dig up the land and line it with concrete/pack it with dry dirt/rock/etc, so might as well expand rather than replace. But they've had to replace the river's concrete before, and I'm not sure how they haven't had to do that elsewhere in the park (since iirc, the park is essentially sitting inside/on top of a concrete box to keep the swampland outside). I dunno, my brain is foggy today, and frankly I don't even know if I'm getting my thoughts across correctly. Basically if they've built on swampland before they can do it again so why not expand if they're gonna have to dig up the land and replace it anyways?
I'm saving this one lmao
 

Charlie The Chatbox Ghost

Well-Known Member
Skynet would be smart enough just to publish false gossip and let humanity eat itself.
Given there's tons of fake sites that post AI generated stories that aren't factual or real (happens especially when Googling specific topics), and social media is more bots than people nowadays, we're already there. Just give it a few more years and people will barely be able to tell who's a human or who's AI, if they can even tell at all.
 

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
Given there's tons of fake sites that post AI generated stories that aren't factual or real (happens especially when Googling specific topics), and social media is more bots than people nowadays, we're already there. Just give it a few more years and people will barely be able to tell who's a human or who's AI, if they can even tell at all.
Sounds like an AI forum bot to me!
 

JD80

Well-Known Member
There are a lot of different conversations going on here and basically everyone is talking past each other. This happens quite a bit in any online forum were you can easily and mistakenly attribute the posts of one person to another when you get invested in a discussion.

There are a few opinions here that are all valid:
  1. It's ok to dislike Disney for taking away ROA/TSI.
  2. It's ok to not care about the loss of ROA/TSI and look forward to the new.
  3. It's ok to be both be sad about what's going away and excited about what's coming next.
  4. It's also ok to be not really care about any of it specifically and just enjoy going to WDW with friends and family.
Don't really think anyone outside maybe a post or two are claiming anything outside the 4 things here.

What is not helpful is the hyperbole and somewhat extreme statements.
 

Charlie The Chatbox Ghost

Well-Known Member
According to Jim Gaffigan, we're all weirdos, lmao
Sam The Eagle Burn GIF
 

DisneyHead123

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?

So I think an important and recent difference is that in the past, lands were meant to be more "timeless". Of course nothing is totally timeless but Disney World was originally based on archetypes that last quite awhile. Some were Americana based, some were whatever the equivalent of that is for other countries (World Showcase), some were from the medieval era with the castles and medieval fairs, some based on lore like explorers and pirates, and so on.

The thing about IP (and this applies to Epic as well,) is that while it's cool and modern, it's almost certainly going to have a shorter shelf life. And sometimes I think the two can be blended - HTTYD represents a specific IP, but also an archetypal time period. The princesses are another obvious example. But sometimes I think relying heavily on IP has the same pros and cons as relying on viral trends. They can pack a big punch in the short term but once their moment in the sun is done, people move on. A few will go on to become classics in their own right but most will end up as funny nostalgic memes ("Hey 2020s kids, remember when we used to do X, Y, and Z. What was our deal, lol!")

I'm not here to say one is inherently right or wrong. I love much of what Disney is doing right now (I'm very very excited for Villains land,) but I just don't think there's anything archetypal about cartoon Cars. (And to be fair I may be biased because even though I have a vehicle loving son, the Cars movies freaked him out for some reason. He couldn't deal with the stress of Lightning McQueen potentially losing and decided he hated the movie. If they were putting in a Minecraft land, I might suddenly come up with some creative excuses as to why new and viral is Good Actually, lol.)
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Basically if they've built on swampland before they can do it again so why not expand if they're gonna have to dig up the land and replace it anyways?
Because maintaining 20 developed acres every minute of every day is more expensive and complex than maintaining 10 developed acres?

I don't understand how people continue to fail to grasp this concept - They replace stuff they deem suitable to give up because to keep operating it IS NOT FREE.

Do you not replace your socks and old pants when you no longer need them? Or do you keep adding more dressers in your bedroom everytime you buy new clothes?

People need to get it through their skulls - they didn't give up TSI/RoA because there was no where else to put this new thing... they gave them up because they didn't want to keep them operating.
 

mlayton144

Well-Known Member
I mean, grandkids to grandparents can enjoy a lot of attractions, but if are heaviest point is saying, "I think my grandkids will enjoy it." In terms of a property replacing a classic Disney attraction...and said is based on Cars and it's Plane Spinoff from nearly two decades ago...
I don't think that states much faith. I hope all enjoy it. But Cars fans are not thick in the grandchildren age. It would be like saying in the 1970s that you hope your grandkids love the new Davy Crocketland taking over Mainstreet USA.
Nope, people who grew up with cars will be entering a world in a few years where they get to make decisions on where they and their families go -
 

Chi84

Premium Member
I mean, grandkids to grandparents can enjoy a lot of attractions, but if are heaviest point is saying, "I think my grandkids will enjoy it." In terms of a property replacing a classic Disney attraction...and said is based on Cars and it's Plane Spinoff from nearly two decades ago...
I don't think that states much faith. I hope all enjoy it. But Cars fans are not thick in the grandchildren age. It would be like saying in the 1970s that you hope your grandkids love the new Davy Crocketland taking over Mainstreet USA.
They’ll like the ride. I think the IP will be secondary.
 

Advisable Joseph

Well-Known Member
They’ll like the ride. I think the IP will be secondary.
And I think buried in this thread is evidence that Cars is still popular.

On another note, I see people here seeing patterns in noise and not seeing patterns that are actually there. It's a wide-spread problem in online fandoms, since it leads to anger that is mystifying to the creators and bullies normal people who stumble in from enjoyment.
 

Advisable Joseph

Well-Known Member
I believe I was careful to limit my statements to my own thoughts and experiences.
Just for reference, I was talking about general audiences based on surveys and wide-spread ratings. Also, checking on Twitter, taking care to ignore "DisTwitter." The latter is important lest one falls into the echo chamber.

I just don't think of it in terms of being an art form. If others do, it explains their emotional attachment but I don't feel the same way. I have no idea why you find that staggering.
I don't think they mean art but ART.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom