MK Piston Peak and Villains Land Construction Thread

[jah4955]

The dark water system at Disneyland isn’t about controlling stormwater. It’s just an efficiency thing where there is one central pump moving the water instead of a bunch of individual local pumps moving the water in each location. The central pumps were even relocated for Galaxy’s Edge. The Submarine Lagoon is not part of the system as it requires very clear water. I’m not certain if the Motorboat Cruise lagoon is part of it, but if it is, it was an addition that could be removed like any other body simply by replacing it with pipes. It’s a purely artificial system so there isn’t a requirement to hold a certain minimum volume of water.

To the extent the Magic Kingdom has anything comparable it is just the Jungle Cruise and central hub waterway. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was a separate clear water system. The Rivers of America was also separate and directly connected to Seven Seas Lagoon and Bay Lake. It also was designed with the purpose of collecting rainwater like a stormwater pond.

Thank you for the insights...

 

[jah4955]

A coaster doesn’t need to occupy a lot of land, just look at Big Thunder Mountain Railroad. As of right now, the railroad still remains as an obstacle that is being retained. Even a coaster going over the tracks is going to need a way to get evacuated guests back to the guest areas of the park.

Btmrr is a pretty big footprint

 

[Incomudro]

I have been thinking about this.

Expectations.

Until recently, I always had higher expectations of Disneyparks compared to other theme parks.

The hard truth is, Disneyparks are just a business and its actually not fair to have any higher expectations of Disneyparks compared to Universal, Legoland, Dollywood, SeaWorld and others.

My "expectations reset" is a good thing! There is no longer disappointment or anger. Just try to enjoy whatever comes to be.

Those expectations were earned because Disney did things better, and parks like Universal were pretenders to the throne.
I defended that position until just a couple of years ago.
Now, look at Galaxy's Edge - land that is supposed to be a living occupied outpost and it's essentially dead.
Virtually nothing moves.
Contrast that to Epic Universe where at say How to Train your Dragon, there is so much movement.

 

[jah4955]

Those expectations were earned because Disney did things better, and parks like Universal were pretenders to the throne.
I defended that position until just a couple of years ago.
Now, look at Galaxy's Edge - land that is supposed to be a living occupied outpost and it's essentially dead.
Virtually nothing moves.
Contrast that to Epic Universe where at say How to Train your Dragon, there is so much movement.

When universal first opened in 1990 most reviews I heard from those i knew told me Disney had notttthing to worry about. Fast forward to this week and you have THE Joe Rhode tipping his hat to Epic.

I was hoping the "wake up call" was the first Potterland. Those crowds! As of now I'm not sure Disney'll ever truly wake up

 

[sedati]

When universal first opened in 1990 most reviews I heard from those i knew told me Disney had notttthing to worry about. Fast forward to this week and you have THE Joe Rhode tipping his hat to Epic.

I was hoping the "wake up call" was the first Potterland. Those crowds! As of now I'm not sure Disney'll ever truly wake up

Joe didn't go to Epic. He sat with the designers. What he was praising was the design theory behind Epic, not the outcome.

 

[jah4955]

Joe didn't go to Epic. He sat with the designers. What he was praising was the design theory behind Epic, not the outcome.

Verrrrrry interesting

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Joe didn't go to Epic. He sat with the designers. What he was praising was the design theory behind Epic, not the outcome.

Just curious- do you know for a fact that Joe hasn’t been to Epic?

 

[Brer Panther]

The first Harry Potter Land WAS a wakeup call for Disney. They just learned the wrong lessons from it.

 

[RoysCabin]

The first Harry Potter Land WAS a wakeup call for Disney. They just learned the wrong lessons from it.

Yep, I've said it a bunch of times, but Disney management saw the Potter land and thought "oh, just get a popular IP and recreate it in a theme park", stripping away all other context about what makes those areas work versus a lot of other "IP Lands".

While I'm not particularly keen on Potter, myself, it's still a franchise based around "literary DNA": franchises based around a book don't just thrive on visuals, but can engage all of the senses because books come with descriptions of everything from the sights to the sounds to the smells and tastes and even feeling in the air. People liked getting to walk through Hogwarts on their way to the ride in Forbidden Journey, but they really loved coming to the land and knowing they'll get to try a butter beer or what have you. This makes translating an IP to a 3D themed entertainment space so much more straightforward and workable, and such thorough descriptions are often what makes people such fervent fans of that IP to begin with.

Instead, Disney just figured it was about the relevance and size of a given IP: just toss a name out there, and fans will come flocking, right? And then you plop something as bland as Toy Story Land down, or make a place like Galaxy's Edge that has some cool design elements but stems from a franchise that isn't really super invested in location-making, or you get Pandora which is well designed, but would likely be even more interesting if it wasn't associated with its IP, given that Avatar draws box office money but somehow doesn't have a ton of everyday cultural cache.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Yep, I've said it a bunch of times, but Disney management saw the Potter land and thought "oh, just get a popular IP and recreate it in a theme park", stripping away all other context about what makes those areas work versus a lot of other "IP Lands".

While I'm not particularly keen on Potter, myself, it's still a franchise based around "literary DNA": franchises based around a book don't just thrive on visuals, but can engage all of the senses because books come with descriptions of everything from the sights to the sounds to the smells and tastes and even feeling in the air. People liked getting to walk through Hogwarts on their way to the ride in Forbidden Journey, but they really loved coming to the land and knowing they'll get to try a butter beer or what have you. This makes translating an IP to a 3D themed entertainment space to much more straightforward and workable, and such thorough descriptions are often what makes people such fervent fans of that IP to begin with.

Instead, Disney just figured it was about the relevance and size of a given IP: just toss a name out there, and fans will come flocking, right? And then you plop something as bland as Toy Story Land down, or make a place like Galaxy's Edge that has some cool design elements but stems from a franchise that isn't really super invested in location-making, or you get Pandora which is well designed, but would likely be even more interesting if it wasn't associated with its IP, given that Avatar draws box office money but somehow doesn't have a ton of everyday cultural cache.

Harry Potter also lends itself to a theme park land because of all the in-universe food and beverage items and the fact that its hero's journey involves the lead inheriting a ton of money and buying stuff from all the rite of passage stores.

Other IPs simply don't have this. Disney's many attempts to find a comparable drink to Butterbear are a microcosm of trying to replicate WW's success in a literal sense that doesn't understand the appeal of theme parks or the IPs they want to use. Blue Milk was just an everyday thing to Luke Skywalker. There wasn't anything special about it to him.

 

[DrStarlander]

Yep, I've said it a bunch of times, but Disney management saw the Potter land and thought "oh, just get a popular IP and recreate it in a theme park", stripping away all other context about what makes those areas work versus a lot of other "IP Lands".

While I'm not particularly keen on Potter, myself, it's still a franchise based around "literary DNA": franchises based around a book don't just thrive on visuals, but can engage all of the senses because books come with descriptions of everything from the sights to the sounds to the smells and tastes and even feeling in the air. People liked getting to walk through Hogwarts on their way to the ride in Forbidden Journey, but they really loved coming to the land and knowing they'll get to try a butter beer or what have you. This makes translating an IP to a 3D themed entertainment space to much more straightforward and workable, and such thorough descriptions are often what makes people such fervent fans of that IP to begin with.

Instead, Disney just figured it was about the relevance and size of a given IP: just toss a name out there, and fans will come flocking, right? And then you plop something as bland as Toy Story Land down, or make a place like Galaxy's Edge that has some cool design elements but stems from a franchise that isn't really super invested in location-making, or you get Pandora which is well designed, but would likely be even more interesting if it wasn't associated with its IP, given that Avatar draws box office money but somehow doesn't have a ton of everyday cultural cache.

It also helps the Wizarding World lands that they are grounded in a timeless, charming part of the real world (shop-lined village streets, tavern, castle, train...). These things are cozy and relatable like a Thomas Kinkade painting. Who wouldn't want to go there and browse around a candy shop and buy a scarf with a hot bev? It's appealing like Main Street and New Orleans Square are.

Meanwhile, I walk around Star Wars Galaxy's Edge and it's well done in terms of details and scenic theming but overall is unrelatable and sad (even as an age 50s lifetime Star Wars fan). I don't want to just be happy there. Especially if I can go over to New Orleans Square instead and can hear jazz and watch the river traffic (talking about Disneyland of course, I'm west coast).

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

Yep, I've said it a bunch of times, but Disney management saw the Potter land and thought "oh, just get a popular IP and recreate it in a theme park", stripping away all other context about what makes those areas work versus a lot of other "IP Lands".

While I'm not particularly keen on Potter, myself, it's still a franchise based around "literary DNA": franchises based around a book don't just thrive on visuals, but can engage all of the senses because books come with descriptions of everything from the sights to the sounds to the smells and tastes and even feeling in the air. People liked getting to walk through Hogwarts on their way to the ride in Forbidden Journey, but they really loved coming to the land and knowing they'll get to try a butter beer or what have you. This makes translating an IP to a 3D themed entertainment space to much more straightforward and workable, and such thorough descriptions are often what makes people such fervent fans of that IP to begin with.

Instead, Disney just figured it was about the relevance and size of a given IP: just toss a name out there, and fans will come flocking, right? And then you plop something as bland as Toy Story Land down, or make a place like Galaxy's Edge that has some cool design elements but stems from a franchise that isn't really super invested in location-making, or you get Pandora which is well designed, but would likely be even more interesting if it wasn't associated with its IP, given that Avatar draws box office money but somehow doesn't have a ton of everyday cultural cache.

To be fair, Universal also did the exact same thing and went for basically the same land 3x + stuff like Minions Land and the rest of Epic.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

Just curious- do you know for a fact that Joe hasn’t been to Epic?

I know what @sedati is taking about because I read about it earlier this week.

According to website shall not be named, Joe himself has stated he didn't go to Epic yet.

 

[DisneyHead123]

I know what @sedati is taking about because I read about it earlier this week.

According to website shall not be named, Joe himself has stated he didn't go to Epic yet.

It’s from Rohde’s Instagram originally if anyone wants to read it there. I can’t seem to copy paste or directly link Insta posts or I would (not sure if it’s my phone or if I’m becoming illiterate with new technology, ha ha).

I agree with Rohde’s take on the type of intricate, detailed, exploration-encouraging lands that I think fit the psychology of this moment. To be fair, there were probably other moments in time when other things fit. So I think it’s relative. When I look at Toy Story Land, for example, my complaint is that while it’s colorful and delightful, it feels mostly like a bunch of tall signposts to look at. But wasn’t that kind of the thing in, say, the 50s? Era of the automobile, road signs and roadside attractions that were essentially just a bunch of interesting things to look at?

But again, in this moment of “unlocking levels”, cosplay, the cliched-but-still-applicable word “immersive”, and so on, I don’t think there’s a substitute for lands that are more like actual recreations of real, fantastical places.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

It’s from Rohde’s Instagram originally if anyone wants to read it there. I can’t seem to copy paste or directly link Insta posts or I would

Oh I’m surprised I haven’t seen it - I follow him religiously!!! (And Instagram is almost impossible to copy - it’s not you!)

 

[DisneyHead123]

Oh I’m surprised I haven’t seen it - I follow him religiously!!! (And Instagram is almost impossible to copy - it’s not you!)

Of thank goodness, lol, I couldn’t figure out what the issue was!

 

[sedati]

Just curious- do you know for a fact that Joe hasn’t been to Epic?

 

[Vinnie Mac]

When universal first opened in 1990 most reviews I heard from those i knew told me Disney had notttthing to worry about. Fast forward to this week and you have THE Joe Rhode tipping his hat to Epic.

I was hoping the "wake up call" was the first Potterland. Those crowds! As of now I'm not sure Disney'll ever truly wake up

I think as of now I'd still put Disney above Universal but between me and my family, we have actually started to include Universal in the same conversation as a Disney trip many times. My families view of Universal is now almost equal to their view of Disney which seemed unfathomable 6-10 years ago. The fact that Universal has even remotely evened the playing field creatively is crazy to me

 

[BrianLo]

or you get Pandora which is well designed, but would likely be even more interesting if it wasn't associated with its IP, given that Avatar draws box office money but somehow doesn't have a ton of everyday cultural cache.

Not to take away from your very broader and what I agree to other points. But I would like to strongly contest this one.

There isn’t any sort of artistic or execution superiority that springs with such assurance from scratch. Pandora has been WDW’s most successful offering from the last two decades. It significantly shifted attendance pre-pandemic. Nothing about an original project would have contained the fiscal blessing nor perfectionist oversight of Cameron. Disney has created many, many original projects over its entire existence and many of them have been far worse efforts than Pandora.

To say it is would likely be even more interesting seems incredibly unlikely. Similar to Universal having an awfully uneven to poor track record without the oversight of WB studios and a set production bible to mimic.

 

[jah4955]

I think as of now I'd still put Disney above Universal but between me and my family, we have actually started to include Universal in the same conversation as a Disney trip many times. My families view of Universal is now almost equal to their view of Disney which seemed unfathomable 6-10 years ago. The fact that Universal has even remotely evened the playing field creatively is crazy to me

That's a wake up call if I've ever heard one: From undisputed champion for decades to little more that "just another park offering."