SaveDinosaur
Well-Known Member
There’s an important distinction between Expedition Everest and what's being proposed with Indiana Jones.Everything they've released so far about Expedition Everest makes it feel like a terrible fit for Animal Kingdom. It heavily focuses on yetis, mythology, anthropology, and Himalayan adventure — themes that align much more with Adventureland at Magic Kingdom than with a park centered around animals.
Animal Kingdom was originally designed to have just one fantasy-based area: Beastly Kingdom, which ended up being replaced by Pandora. Adding yet another fantastical land with yetis right next to Finding Nemo doesn’t feel thematically appropriate and risks weakening the park’s unique identity.
While Everest includes mythological elements like the Yeti, it still stays grounded in themes of wildlife, nature, and environmental respect — which are central to Animal Kingdom's identity. The attraction is framed around a real Himalayan ecosystem, with deep cultural authenticity, conservation messaging, and the relationship between humans and nature. The Yeti, in this context, serves as an extension of animal mythology, not a purely supernatural figure.
Indiana Jones, on the other hand, is rooted in archeology, human myth, and pulp adventure, with little to no connection to animals, conservation, or natural environments beyond set dressing. Its focus is much more about treasure hunting, ancient curses, and supernatural powers — things that fit far more naturally in Adventureland, which was built on that exact spirit of exoticized human exploration.
So while Everest may stretch the theme slightly, it still supports Animal Kingdom’s overarching message. Indiana Jones feels like a thematic mismatch — especially when combined with Encanto, which is another magical fantasy IP with minimal animal or nature focus.
Animal Kingdom's strength lies in its unique identity among the Disney parks. Diluting that with IPs that don’t align philosophically with its core mission weakens what makes it special.