MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[mickEblu]

I don't think it's relevant at all outside discussing history.

edit to add: Walt's ethos is what should be held up. His demand for the highest quality storytelling, pushing the boundaries of technology to create new ways to tell stories. His eye for detail and the attention to how everything is presented on stage from trash cans to creating a family friendly environment.

If you can uphold those principals when replacing things or adding things to the parks then you are well on your way to being successful. What you're replacing and how doesn't really matter.

How is plopping the Cars ride in the middle of Frontierland and disregarding the remaining areas that were designed to be facing the river the highest quality story telling?

 

[TheMaxRebo]

How is plopping the Cars ride in the middle of Frontierland and disregarding the remaining areas that were designed to be facing the river the highest quality story telling?

if the end result is simply "plopping" a Cars themed attraction in the middle with no theming to tie thing together then it isn't a high level of story telling

If it is adding a highly themed national park area that within contains an attraction but also pulls in from the surrounding areas (such as the rainbow pools coming down and connecting to Big Thunder Mountain) and it expands the general story telling of exploring the frontier of North America (which is what has been shared so far) then it can be a very high level of story telling.

So it might be, it might not be - it matters on the end result not simply the initial decision to take out the river

 

[James Alucobond]

How is plopping the Cars ride in the middle of Frontierland and disregarding the remaining areas that were designed to be facing the river the highest quality story telling?

He didn’t say it was.

 

[mickEblu]

if the end result is simply "plopping" a Cars themed attraction in the middle with no theming to tie thing together then it isn't a high level of story telling

If it is adding a highly themed national park area that within contains an attraction but also pulls in from the surrounding areas (such as the rainbow pools coming down and connecting to Big Thunder Mountain) and it expands the general story telling of exploring the frontier of North America (which is what has been shared so far) then it can be a very high level of story telling.

So it might be, it might not be - it matters on the end result not simply the initial decision to take out the river

Highly themed or not, the remaining lands attractions around Frontierland and Liberty Square were not designed to be facing a national park. The story telling / place making will be downgraded no matter how you look at it. What remains to be seen is how much of a downgrade it will be.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Highly themed or not, the remaining lands attractions around Frontierland and Liberty Square were not designed to be facing a national park. The story telling / place making will be downgraded no matter how you look at it. What remains to be seen is how much of a downgrade it will be.

and I am going in optimistic that it could be an upgrade - but we shall see ... or maybe some elements are a little lesser and some are greater. Execution will be key but the decision doesn't mean it can't be good storytelling

 

[mickEblu]

He didn’t say it was.

He can speak for himself.

 

[mickEblu]

and I am going in optimistic that it could be an upgrade - but we shall see ... or maybe some elements are a little lesser and some are greater. Execution will be key but the decision doesn't mean it can't be good storytelling

But it will be replacing better story telling. That’s the point.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

But it will be replacing better story telling. That’s the point.

and I say that isn't a guarantee it could be worse it could wind up a million times better - you can go in negative if you want though

 

[James Alucobond]

He can speak for himself.

You can also not imply things that weren’t said, but here we are.

 

[lazyboy97o]

if the end result is simply "plopping" a Cars themed attraction in the middle with no theming to tie thing together then it isn't a high level of story telling

If it is adding a highly themed national park area that within contains an attraction but also pulls in from the surrounding areas (such as the rainbow pools coming down and connecting to Big Thunder Mountain) and it expands the general story telling of exploring the frontier of North America (which is what has been shared so far) then it can be a very high level of story telling.

So it might be, it might not be - it matters on the end result not simply the initial decision to take out the river

Theming is not what creates spatial design.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Theming is not what creates spatial design.

never said it did - and question was storytelling not spatial design

again, this could have amazing spatial design, or it could be terrible. We shall see ... but just being "different' doesn't mandate it is worse

 

[mickEblu]

and I say that isn't a guarantee it could be worse it could wind up a million times better - you can go in negative if you want though

A million times better? You are saying there is a possibility that modern WDI goes in and not only retrofits a core part of the park that will turn out better than Walt Disney/ WED’s original design did but it will also work better with the remaining lands/ attractions that were designed to be around the river/ island? And that not only it might come out better but perhaps a million times better? I’m disheartened by the logic here.

 

[lazyboy97o]

never said it did - and question was storytelling not spatial design

again, this could have amazing spatial design, or it could be terrible. We shall see ... but just being "different' doesn't mandate it is worse

You were responding to a comment about the way the lands are oriented around the river, which is the spatial design. Themed entertainment is storytelling through built space. The spatial design is absolutely part of the storytelling.

 

[mickEblu]

You can also not imply things that weren’t said, but here we are.

Lets people speak for themselves. You don’t always have to be Captain Save a …

 

[TheMaxRebo]

A million times better? You are saying there is a possibility that modern WDI goes in and not only retrofits a core part of the park that will turn out better than Walt Disney/ WED’s original design did but it will also work better with the remaining lands/ attractions that were designed to be around the river/ island? And that not only it might come out better but perhaps a million times better? I’m disheartened by the logic here.

obviously that is an exaggeration, the chances of it being even significantly better are likely low. I do think it is very possible that some elements are better and some are worse - I just don't think it is automatic that every aspect of it will be a major downgrade and just awful or that everything before is perfect just because it already exists

 

[mickEblu]

obviously that is an exaggeration, the chances of it being even significantly better are likely low. I do think it is very possible that some elements are better and some are worse - I just don't think it is automatic that every aspect of it will be a major downgrade and just awful or that everything before is perfect just because it already exists

The odds of it being better at all are astronomically low to impossible. They are purposely hiding certain parts of Piston Peak from Frontierland and Liberty Square. This should tell one everything they need to know.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

You were responding to a comment about the way the lands are oriented around the river, which is the spatial design. Themed entertainment is storytelling through built space. The spatial design is absolutely part of the storytelling.

part of sure - and relevant ... but again, could be better now. Now there will be ways around the backside to walk and things could be arranged better with that larger/circular take (just as one element to it)

Now things can flow better from the different elements and how they are spaced and connected - like the rainbow pools flowing down/spacially designed form Big Thunder into the new area

Maybe the end result will be a disaster and awful - but just because something was there before doesn't mean it was perfect/can never be touched/anything replacing it is automatically a disaster before it is even built

 

[Chi84]

The odds of it being better at all are astronomically low to impossible. They are purposely hiding certain parts of Piston Peak from Frontierland and Liberty Square. This should tell one everything they need to know.

And yet some people are inclined to wait before passing judgment. Nothing wrong with that because what’s better for some may be worse for others.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

The odds of it being better at all are astronomically low to impossible. They are purposely hiding certain parts of Piston Peak from Frontierland and Liberty Square. This should tell one everything they need to know.

and that I disagree with - and think if you are going in with that opinion you aren't going to give the final result a proper chance

And they are hiding some elements and highlighting/showing off other elements - part of the design

 

[lazyboy97o]

part of sure - and relevant ... but again, could be better now. Now there will be ways around the backside to walk and things could be arranged better with that larger/circular take (just as one element to it)

Now things can flow better from the different elements and how they are spaced and connected - like the rainbow pools flowing down/spacially designed form Big Thunder into the new area

Maybe the end result will be a disaster and awful - but just because something was there before doesn't mean it was perfect/can never be touched/anything replacing it is automatically a disaster before it is even built

This addresses nothing I said.