• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Rumor Lion King Flume Ride being considered for Animal Kingdom

RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
I don't know why anyone would want to put more carnival type rides at Animal Kingdom after we're finally getting rid of the carnival section.

It needs more attractions, but stuff like that just doesn't fit the park.
Click to expand...

James Alucobond said:
Agreed. Anything B-ticket or below at AK either needs to be disguised well or believably built into the fabric of the village area. I don’t think there’s much that you could thoughtfully integrate into Harambe from the standard stable of A/B attractions. The kakamora spinner would have worked with the Moana proposal mostly because of the IP, which established kakamora technology as looking a certain way that could conceivably be seamlessly overlaid on such an attraction. Pandora might actually be the easiest place to add a lower tier attraction because you could theme it with the Earth settlers’ technology, but there are also way more interesting things they could do with the IP.
Click to expand...
I think the Carousel coming to Tropical Americas would absolutely be more at home in Discovery Island, but I really don't think it's going to be aesthetically out of place in Tropical Americas.

While I strongly disliked the concept, the Chris Beatty Moana spinner did look pretty cool. Of course it probably would have been the world's first $200 million spinner.

In general, I'm in the camp that the B/C ticket experiences in the park should focus on live animals. I understand that everyone wants rides, but the two main animal walk throughs are far more engaging than any flat ride.
 
phillip9698

phillip9698

Well-Known Member
President Loki said:
There is this website called Park Lore that specializes in theme park content. They have a series where this one guy makes improved versions of Disney parks. He recently made an improved Animal Kingdom and it involved A Bug's Land, but it uses the building layout from Ariel's Grotto at Disney Seas. Just thought it was interesting to mention.
Click to expand...

Thanks for mentioning that site. Never heard of it but seems interesting.
 
dennis-in-ct

dennis-in-ct

Well-Known Member
Rich Brownn said:
The problem with basing it on the old ticket system is: the tickets were never geared to how good or bad a ride was, but how popular the attraction was. Its one of the reasons HoP and CBJ swapped D and E tickets early on, The tiers were an incentive to ride smaller, less flashier attractions (like Main Street Vehicles and the Cinema) rather than to provide a quality classification.
Click to expand...
Here are the A, B, Cs of the ticketing system (Dec 1970) for some historical perspective in case anyone is interested.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9472.jpeg
    IMG_9472.jpeg
    225.5 KB · Views: 125
  • IMG_9473.jpeg
    IMG_9473.jpeg
    230.7 KB · Views: 127
nickys

nickys

Premium Member
Gusey said:
I think it was one of those rumors where something was rumored (a Lion King flume ride) but its destination was assumed for WDW, when it was actually for DLP
Click to expand...
But the rumour was for a clone or a simpler version of the DLP ride coming to AK.

Given the new land coming though, if this is still on the table it’ll be a few years away.
 
KDM31091

KDM31091

Well-Known Member
I think AK just needs more attractions period. It has a very slim roster and Tropical Americas when all is said and done is not doing much to change that. Filler attractions are needed, be it more animal walkthroughs, B or C ticket rides, etc. Otherwise it turns into the DHS problem of too many long line attractions and almost nothing that is a short wait consistently. AK is almost always the least crowded of the four and I really don't think beyond the initial hype that anything they are adding right now is going to change that in the long term.

Of course, this could have been rectified had they done the obvious and simply built Tropical Americas on new land as a true expansion and kept/improved Dinoland. I really do not get why they are so expansion averse in general. At Disneyland it makes sense being a landlocked park in the middle of the city. WDW doesn't have that excuse. Expansions should happen, not just replacements of previous rides/capacity/areas.
 
FutureCEO

FutureCEO

Well-Known Member
KDM31091 said:
I think AK just needs more attractions period. It has a very slim roster and Tropical Americas when all is said and done is not doing much to change that. Filler attractions are needed, be it more animal walkthroughs, B or C ticket rides, etc. Otherwise it turns into the DHS problem of too many long line attractions and almost nothing that is a short wait consistently. AK is almost always the least crowded of the four and I really don't think beyond the initial hype that anything they are adding right now is going to change that in the long term.

Of course, this could have been rectified had they done the obvious and simply built Tropical Americas on new land as a true expansion and kept/improved Dinoland. I really do not get why they are so expansion averse in general. At Disneyland it makes sense being a landlocked park in the middle of the city. WDW doesn't have that excuse. Expansions should happen, not just replacements of previous rides/capacity/areas.
Click to expand...

It's really sad when the Magic Kingdom has more rides than Animal Kingdom, MGM and Epcot put together.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
FutureCEO said:
It's really sad when the Magic Kingdom has more rides than Animal Kingdom, MGM and Epcot put together.
Click to expand...
DHS, EPCOT, and DAK are all underbuilt as far as attractions... EPCOT should have really been the park with a lot more attractions than it currently has... It was really designed for epic crowds...and now there are fewer attractions than in the 90s....and some of what started out as so amazing has been reduced and dumbed down...or just plain shuttered. Add to that the mess they made of the front half of the park, it is really kind of sad and shows a lack of leadership and understanding of what the park is...and what it was designed to be...
 
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
KDM31091 said:
I really do not get why they are so expansion averse in general. At Disneyland it makes sense being a landlocked park in the middle of the city. WDW doesn't have that excuse. Expansions should happen, not just replacements of previous rides/capacity/areas.
Click to expand...
From my understanding, it's just cheaper to replace or retheme a pre-existing attraction than it is to build something new? Because it saves costs? Somehow?
 
N

Nickm2022

Well-Known Member
Personally hope once they finish the refresh of "underutilized areas" we see more additions to AK and DHS. Only reason I don't include EP is id rather them update SSE, Figment, and Mexico's ride before they build a new one. Or even a mission:space replacement. However with AK and DHS, after these expansions they'll be in a good place to get even more hopefully
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
Brer Panther said:
From my understanding, it's just cheaper to replace or retheme a pre-existing attraction than it is to build something new? Because it saves costs? Somehow?
Click to expand...
Less staffing, keeping two rides open is going to cost more with staffing, electric, facilities, etc.

With replacing you can basically keep all of that stuff, get a building already connected to the utilities etc and just reuse the same staff you originally had or slightly more rather than a whole new orientation.
 
HauntedPirate

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
Brer Panther said:
From my understanding, it's just cheaper to replace or retheme a pre-existing attraction than it is to build something new? Because it saves costs? Somehow?
Click to expand...
IIRC, as long as one wall remains from the existing building, they can tear down the rest and it's still considered a remodel vs. a new build. In that situation, permitting is different and thus, costs are different. This is why they did the UoE replacement the way they did it as well as Under the Sea (more "famously") in the new Fantasyland. It has nothing to do with staffing. :rolleyes:
 

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

Back
Top Bottom