DAK “Zootopia” is being created for the Tree of Life theater

[DisneyHead123]

I'm not trying to argue any of that. I was drawn in by your statement of "Other than Frozen, traditional IP based dark rides built after the parks were established haven't really taken off though"

I'm still waiting for you to qualify that..

I gave you an outline of my standards for "taking off", but if you need more specificity - I'd say for a ride with Mermaid's rider capacity, at least a 30-40 minute wait, on average, given current park conditions (of course I hope we'll reach a day where even the most popular rides are more accessible, but speaking to the reality of now.)

You said that yours are different and you consider a moderate capacity ride with 15-20 minute waits one that has "taken off". Ok. We'll have to agree to disagree there.

 

[flynnibus]

I gave you an outline of my standards for "taking off", but if you need more specificity - I'd say for a ride with Mermaid's rider capacity, at least a 30-40 minute wait, on average, given current park conditions (of course I hope we'll reach a day where even the most popular rides are more accessible, but speaking to the reality of now.)

You said that yours are different and you consider a moderate capacity ride with 15-20 minute waits one that has "taken off". Ok. We'll have to agree to disagree there.

Your standard basically means it's in the top 1/3 or 1/4 of all attractions. Your standard basically says "you are a top performer, or you are nothing"

That's not a realistic way to evaluate success and is self-serving IMO.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Your standard basically means it's in the top 1/3 or 1/4 of all attractions. Your standard basically says "you are a top performer, or you are nothing"

I did not say that. I said that, in my opinion, it has not "taken off", not that it was "nothing".

When I said "taken off", I was considering the fact that this is an IP ride and so presumably should have an advantage in popularity out of the gate. I was also mentally comparing it to similar rides, with similar ride vehicles and styles (like I said, I don't consider rides with a thrill-ish element, even trackless rides, to be in the same category, as they have that additional element of novelty).

I'm not saying it's doing terribly. I'm saying it's not proof of concept that IP is automatically where it's at. There are a few non-IP rides performing much better, and Little Mermaid is doing ok but not exactly lighting the world on fire. Again - my overarching point there is that I think there's a case to be made for non-IP, in that it might work better from a rider perspective (in some instances).

 

[networkpro]

So for the items that matters, I wonder what the comparisions between the old attraction and the new one will be for:

Customer satisfaction scores
Wait times

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Hey! Minion Mayhem actually dodges all the narrative pitfalls Zootopia stumbles into. Zootopia is a massively superior IP, but Mayhem would have been a better blueprint for the new attraction then whatever they used.

I don't hate Minion Mayhem either, I brought it up as a general standard for movie tie-in 3D attractions that I think Disney was consciously or not trying to emulate.

 

[MrPromey]

Better yet:

View attachment 892422

It would oddly be a good fit given some of the issues they've had around the tree in years not so past...

 

[Brer Panther]

Huh, most of my posts bringing up Splash Mountain in this thread were removed. Should've expected that...

I think a lot of it is risk aversion. It is much less risky to give people things they already know and like. It's also much easier to market since people already know the property it is based on.

This is basically the same mindset for why most of the films released nowadays are sequels, remakes, and reboots, isn't it? Because it's "less risky"?

The question is, where did they get this idea? As soon as Iger came in, Disney only started building IP-based attractions, so it couldn't have been because of some original attraction that was such a huge failure that it convinced them IP-less attractions were dangerous.

Do you think it's because of how successful Harry Potter Land was for Universal? We all know Disney's been desperate to cash in on that...

They've always been at their strongest with their attention to detail and theming but more and more, there is a budget growing for other regional chains to do amazing dark rides too. An amazing dark ride doesn't necessarily "cut it" anymore.

What other theme park has an amazing dark ride built after 2010? Most of the non-Disney dark rides built since then are screen-filled Midway Mania clones... Reese's Cupfusion or whatever it's called in Hershey Park, the new Knott's Bear-y Tales, the Justice League dark rides at Six Flags parks...

Heck, how many dark rides has Universal opened since Islands of Adventure opened in 1999? SeaWorld doesn't even have any dark rides at all, does it?

For example, if Little Mermaid or Nemo had just been based on the theme of 'oceans', imagine how creative and elaborate those scenes could have been. Literally anything in the oceans to choose from. Instead they are based on movies, meaning we have to see a given sequence of characters who may or may not make for a particularly interesting ride experience.

A Little Mermaid or Finding Nemo dark ride isn't a bad idea on paper - I think the environments lend themselves to a fun dark ride. It's the execution of both that's lacking.

Is what your saying if they rethemed Soarin with an IP that the ride would draw bigger crowds ?

Soarin' gets huge crowds already, it's clearly doing just fine without an IP (though I'm sure that was your point).

I'd challenge you to actually name ones that WEREN'T successful.. because just going from memory here I can't think of any that were not that didn't have some major cripple factor like Nemo did.

How many non-trackless dark rides has Disney built since Little Mermaid? People are apparently so impressed by Runaway Railway, Ratatouille, and Rise of the Resistance's not having tracks that they don't notice what problems those attractions have. Not that Rise of the Resistance is bad, but it's not a flawless ride.

Still anchors NFL in Florida.. doesn't sit empty.. still attracts thousands of riders.. still can push out long LL return times.. still can avg nearly 30min waits for a omnimover.. still anchors a top princess in the park. What more do you want?

A Little Mermaid dark ride that's actually good?

My general point is that there's an insistence on using IP, but people don't always flock to something simply because it's IP based.

Exactly. Stitch's Great Escape had a popular IP attached to it and was a failure. Same goes for the Legend of Captain Jack Sparrow and the Galactic Starcruiser, both of which were built under Iger.

 

[mattpeto]

Agreed with everything here, with the caveat that, having just visited, I’m reminded Animal Kingdom DESPERATELY needs additions, not replacements. So even though Tropical should make the park the best it’s ever been, it still is woefully underbuilt!

It really does. AK also has an enormous footprint which probably muddles expanding the boundaries but would be nice to use a plot or two.

 

[mattpeto]

I don't hate Minion Mayhem either, I brought it up as a general standard for movie tie-in 3D attractions that I think Disney was consciously or not trying to emulate.

Minion Mayhem is a joke. Might be their best current IP and the ride is a snoozer.

 

[DrStarlander]

Anecdotally, Little Mermaid at DCA has made zero impression on my family and they must be reminded each visit that the attraction exists. Then there's a few minutes discussing if it's worth walking over there for it.

Having said that, it beats Web Slingers. My family does remember it exists and the determination that it's not worth walking over there for it does not require any discussion.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Having said that, it beats Web Slingers.

Eh…. That’s a tough one. If I had to award “best” attraction I think it would go to web slingers cause mermaid is embarrassing with plastic fish etc.

At least web slingers is good for what it is and pretty ideal for the target demo.

It sounds like both would win out over Zootopia though!

 

[Alice a]

No clearer example than Frozen from Malesteom. No one here is gonna pretend that Maelstrom even gets close to as popular of a line as Frozen did

When Maelstrom was only a few years old, as Frozen ride is, it still had a pretty long line. Not as long, due to lower general attendance, people not knowing world showcase had rides, no skip the line options, etc.

In general, until the Frozen meet and greet opened in Norway right after the film took off, I always waited in at least a 20 minute line, in the slow time of year, more than a decade after it opened.

Now, the line is full of families with little girls, who, at least in my on-ride photos, are often terrified of the drop.

So it may be busier, but is the key demographic walking away delighted with the experience?

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

When Maelstrom was only a few years old, as Frozen ride is, it still had a pretty long line. Not as long, due to lower general attendance, people not knowing world showcase had rides, no skip the line options, etc.

In general, until the Frozen meet and greet opened in Norway right after the film took off, I always waited in at least a 20 minute line, in the slow time of year, more than a decade after it opened.

Now, the line is full of families with little girls, who, at least in my on-ride photos, are often terrified of the drop.

So it may be busier, but is the key demographic walking away delighted with the experience? View attachment 892468

I would guess the ride is doing amazing by all metrics considering that Disney decided to clone it 2 more times (not counting Tokyos because iirc the drop is more you being lowered down) AND reinvest in the ride to give it the better faces. Disney has the GSATs and they clearly do pay attention to them and replace/fix stuff based on them (look at all the replacements of these "low GSATs" recently)

 

[James Alucobond]

It really does. AK also has an enormous footprint which probably muddles expanding the boundaries but would be nice to use a plot or two.

It would be pretty easy to meaningfully expand the park in minimally disruptive ways. Both Pandora and Africa have space for an additional attraction to balance the park, and you could probably add a miniland between Asia and Tropical Americas by knocking down Theater in the Wild, turning that into the entrance, and moving the marina across the waterway onto the wedge beside Everest. All of that could easily result in +4 attractions while not affecting anything major in terms of current operations.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

It would be pretty easy to meaningfully expand the park in minimally disruptive ways. Both Pandora and Africa have space for an additional attraction to balance the park, and you could probably add a miniland between Asia and Tropical Americas by knocking down Theater in the Wild, turning that into the entrance, and moving the marina across the waterway onto the wedge beside Everest. All of that could easily result in +4 attractions while not affecting anything major in terms of current operations.

Now what could be a connecting point historically from the Americas to Asia... something that could even match Everest quite well...


An IP that was popular and Disney seems to want to invest in again...

Something perhaps to fill the void of extinct animals....

 

[James Alucobond]

Now what could be a connecting point historically from the Americas to Asia... something that could even match Everest quite well...


An IP that was popular and Disney seems to want to invest in again...

Something perhaps to fill the void of extinct animals....

View attachment 892471

To be honest, I'm still in the Oceania camp. It would be easier to create a "village" section at the entrance aligned with all of the other lands, they could revisit the domed Moana ocean-faring simulator, they could still use Nemo in some capacity, and, if they wanted to pick an IP that genuinely fit well, Rescuers Down Under is right there.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

To be honest, I'm still in the Oceania camp. It would be easier to create a "village" section at the entrance aligned with all of the other lands, they could revisit the domed Moana ocean-faring simulator, they could still use Nemo in some capacity, and, if they wanted to pick an IP that genuinely fit well, Rescuers Down Under is right there.

Oceania is not bad but Nemo is already in Epcot, Moana imo fits better in Adventureland although there could be something to be said about "restoring the balance of nature" and greed destroying it. I just think you would have more space to do Moana justice elsewhere while Ice Age could be a fully indoor land with 1-3 attractions (I would go for a boat ride, a show, and a junior coaster or flat ride) as well as representing something that hasn't been represented at all plus it wouldn't need the live animals as much which I feel like there is simply not enough space for a Moana Attraction, Nemo, and Rescuers in this plot of land. To be honest, I would put it over by Asia instead and still use Oceania for something. This would be more of a transitional land. AK could defo use 2 extra lands anyway and its not THAT crazy since DHS did it only a few years ago.

 

[Brer Panther]

Moana doesn't belong in Animal Kingdom.

 

[Prince-1]

Moana doesn't belong in Animal Kingdom.

Neither does Avatar but it’s there.

 

[aladdin2007]

Moana doesn't belong in Animal Kingdom.

what they slapped down in Epcot for Moana was a better fit for AK. A friend I took recently even said this looks like it should have been at AK instead and shes no Epcot purist......but back to zoomess, zoomiss,,,