I mean one land just with Pixar attractions. Not every movie or series of movie deserves its own land especially in a park with Studios in its name. I know they want to change it but until they drop the name, I am taking it at face value. Also, I find the original concept far more interesting than Random IP dumping ground which is the direction they seem to be taking it.
Buzz is now redundant, and MILF never fit where it is placed.
I want Pixar attractions placed where they make sense, not randomly scattered around different parks also I don't think every Pixar franchise needs an entire land dedicated to it. Why Cars Land worked is because the setting in the movie was believable and even if the anthropomorphic cars weren't there it would still be a good Route 66 tribute the franchise tie-in really is incidental despite what a certain CEO thinks.
MGM in its glory days would really match that description except it was about the movies in general rather than just their studios. Also, the Fantasyland attractions that people point to as exhibit A when discussing IP in the parks originally didn't even have their namesake characters in them. Toad at Disneyland still doesn't so it's obvious while promoting the movies was a factor it wasn't the only factor. Of course, ultimately the respective characters ended up being inserted due to public confusion. The idea of attractions being promotional vehicles for movies came in with Eisner though Eisner to his credit was still open to original concepts. With Iger it became codified that theme parks are just billboards for IP and he thinks that anything can be solved by adding characters and branding to it as if slapping Mickey's face on the Ferris wheel at DCA somehow magically solved the inherit problem with the Paradise/Pixar Pier concept. Now of course he is trying to force the same logic on each park one by one and now EPCOT is a shell of what it used to be, DHS has no reason to exist other than as a random assortment of themes that don't fit anywhere else and now Animal Kingdom will have two entire lands not even based around animals and an attraction in the park icon based on a franchise even Rohde said is not thematically appropriate for the park and is literally the only thing that I have ever seen that has been decried by almost everyone on this forum.
But I "tolerated" those because they were relatively subtle in placement.
While it's nice (in and of itself) that Buzz (an attraction I never really cared for to be "polite"...the only non-complaint I have about it is that family members really liked it) is getting a facelift....it would have been vasssssstly better if they closed both Laugh & Buzz for 1 E-ticket. That's one HUGE building, and if you don't count the Buzz shop they made from out of the IYHW outdoor queue, there would be no interference to dining/shopping.
Frankly, I believe Tomorrowland needs attention FAR more than Frontierland does.
Well, yes, I agree Tomorrowland needs attention this is a separate issue.Frankly, I believe Tomorrowland needs attention FAR more than Frontierland does.
One of my concerns is how they are going to get the forced perspective to work.
Yeah - having three mountain style attractions so close is not ideal - having 2 wasn’t ideal but adding a 3rd isn’t going to help.
And that was with a $400 million budget!
If Disney's original vision (of 20 nations) played-out, it still would have worked.
TL does need it but I'd argue FL and TL are equally outdated and in need of evolving but for different reasons. Both needed something done with them, but FL was clearly the easier undertaking that gave far less disruption to the rest of the park.Frankly, I believe Tomorrowland needs attention FAR more than Frontierland does.
Yeah…. FL seemed oddly stuck in the 1880’s for some reason. So weird!!!!
Okay that was funny but you know what I mean!!!
Eh, they’re about equally disruptive in the ways that matter, maybe slightly less so for Tomorrowland, actually. Taking Space Mountain offline will be equivalent to knocking out Big Thunder, but Space does have the benefit of neighbor TRON covering a similar ride type. The Speedway will probably be about as visually disruptive to redo as the Rivers, but I’m also imagining that, depending on what they build, the timeline might be shorter as a result of less land prep. The other things the land needs (new PeopleMover sets, Stitch replacement, Laugh Floor replacement, etc.) are just reworking content in existing theaters or along existing ride paths. The bones of the land are still good, and most exterior updates could easily be handled piecemeal, like the recent replacement of the Cool Ship.
The reason I think FL first is less disruptive than TL first is because TL just has more to eat people than FL does. BTM being down yes has shown some noticeable impact on the rest of the park, but imagine what things would look like if Space, Buzz, MILF, PeopleMover, Astro Orbitor, Speedway, and Progress were all down. TRON could probably stay bc of the alternate entrance, but Tron alone couldn't save the imbalance.
I’m glad you saw the humor!
They've closed most/all of several Lands several times before:
