FLE vs. Cars Land...

[danstadnik]

I have a question for those of you who know WAY more about this stuff than I do...
Is the FLE going to be any bigger or better than Cars Land in DCA?
It seems to me the unfortunate answer might truly be "no," which is very sad to me. It seems in terms of acreage, Cars Land is going to be just as big as the FLE. And, while I'm excited for TLM and SW&7D's... neither one seems to be as innovative as the Radiator Springs Racers will be. PLUS, DCA gets those floating tire thingys I've always wanted to try!
And I'm not even mentioning that DCA gets its own Little Mermaid, AND gets it first... :brick:
Is this whole FLE not really that big of a deal when all's said and done?

 

[TP2000]

PLUS, DCA gets those floating tire thingys I've always wanted to try!
And I'm not even mentioning that DCA gets its own Little Mermaid, AND gets it first... :brick:

You forgot that Cars Land also has Mater's Junkyard Jamboree, a spinning whip-ride where tractors do a "square dance" to an animatronic Mater calling out square dance calls in the middle of the ride.

Mater's Junkyard Jamboree - Cars Land

Cars Land has three rides, a collection of restaurants and shops, and some of the biggest and most ambitious "placemaking" architecture and Imagineering in any Disney theme park. It's been reported by Disney insiders that Radiator Springs Racers budget alone is just over 350 Million dollars, just for that one mega-E Ticket ride. Cars Land as a whole costs over a half Billion and is designed to put DCA on the map, because quite frankly DCA needs it as the least visited Disney theme park in America.

On the flip side, the FLE project is designed to repurpose existing space and boost overall park capacity in the most visited Disney theme park in America.

The two projects, while similarly sized from an acreage perspective, and quite differently budgeted and are designed to do different things for their respective parks. It's an easy thing to compare them as they both rise from the ground at the same time and head towards a 2012 opening, but they are really quite different animals with different reasons for being. It's not really fair to compare them so closely, and they each have their own merits.

 

[Skipper Dan]

I may get crucified for this, but I personally think that the suits, including John Lasseter - who's one of my heros - just doesn't really care about WDW. They think that Disneyland is sacred, the first, and should get all the love.

 

[wizards8507]

I may get crucified for this, but I personally think that the suits, including John Lasseter - who's one of my heros - just doesn't really care about WDW. They think that Disneyland is sacred, the first, and should get all the love.

 

[jt04]

Utterly pointless thread that makes a pointless comparisson.

Get back to me after the D23 Expo and then we can have an educated and meaningful discussion on the merits of whether WDW is still viewed as a 'backwater' by the suits in California.

Because that is when we will know the answers to the Op's questions. And not a second before I imagine.

 

[marni1971]

Simple answer? No.

Dig deeper and both will have different offerings.

Is this whole FLE not really that big of a deal when all's said and done?

A lot of us have been saying this for over a year.

 

[eilie]

I agree that it's not fair to compare to compare the two expansions, as they address fundamentally different problems in their respective parks. Nevertheless, it is an interesting topic for discussion.

I think Carsland will be amazing and will blow the FLE out of the water in many respects. However, I believe that Carsland is fundamentally flawed in a way that the FLE is not:

Carsland is an entire land based on ONE film (well, franchise I suppose). This has major implications for the long-term popularity, viability, and flexibility of the land. To be sure, there are advantages in the short term from a marketing, merchandising, and corporate synergy standpoint. But what about 20 years from now? Will it be popular? Will people still find the theme of "Carsland" compelling? Will all of the Cars characters and locations in Carsland keep the franchise alive, or will they date it horribly and render it stale? How do imagineers update the land and keep it fresh, without fundamentally changing its theme?

What if in 1955 Walt Disney decided to capitalize on the Davy Crockett merchandise craze and create an entire land called "Crockettland", instead of the broader and infinitely more flexible Frontierland?

Even worse - this penchant for devoting an entire land to the one franchise-of-the-moment seems to have taken hold of Disney management. A Bug's Land? Toy Story Land? Please Disney, just....stop. Whatever happened to long-range creative planning?

Don't get me wrong - I am absolutely fine with basing park attractions on Disney films (though often the best attractions have no movie tie-in). I am very excited for the two new FLE rides, and I think Radiator Springs will be awesome! I just wish it were located in a land that was more encompassing, evocative, and aspirational.

 

[Neverland]

I may get crucified for this, but I personally think that the suits, including John Lasseter - who's one of my heros - just doesn't really care about WDW. They think that Disneyland is sacred, the first, and should get all the love.

I don't think that's entirely true. A few months ago Mr. Lasseter was out in MK's Fantasyland checking out the progress and talking to attractions managers, coordinators, and normal CMs. He walked around the whole area for a pretty long while, inspecting how construction was coming along. He looked excited and pleased with the way things were going. Lots of enthusiasm.

Unfortunately for me, he and my coworkers were across the walkway from me, and I was at a position in which you can't move more than five feet from your spot. :brick: So I got to watch all my friends meet and shake hands with him.

Carsland is an entire land based on ONE film (well, franchise I suppose). This has major implications for the long-term popularity, viability, and flexibility of the land. To be sure, there are advantages in the short term from a marketing, merchandising, and corporate synergy standpoint. But what about 20 years from now? Will it be popular? Will people still find the theme of "Carsland" compelling? Will all of the Cars characters and locations in Carsland keep the franchise alive, or will they date it horribly and render it stale? How do imagineers update the land and keep it fresh, without fundamentally changing its theme?

Definitely agree. One good thing about the FLE is that all its areas' themes have withstood the test of time. Dumbo remains an extremely popular ride, Snow White is still a household name, and TLM and BatB continue to be extremely well-known and well-loved movies 20+ years after their releases.

Cars makes money because little boys like racecars, but personally I have never really cared for the movie, and will probably care even less about it 20 years down the line. I actually don't think any movie should have its own land, for the Crockettland reason you mentioned. And if they had to make a movie-based land, Cars would not be one of the most deserving movies I would think of.

 

[Neverland]

ignore - double post

 

[marni1971]

Will people still find the theme of "Carsland" compelling? Will all of the Cars characters and locations in Carsland keep the franchise alive

Does it matter? There will be a great D ride and one hell of an E Ticket.

Do people care about Song of the South to ride Splash Mountain?

 

[JoClovesCARS]

I agree that it's not fair to compare to compare the two expansions, as they address fundamentally different problems in their respective parks. Nevertheless, it is an interesting topic for discussion.

I think Carsland will be amazing and will blow the FLE out of the water in many respects. However, I believe that Carsland is fundamentally flawed in a way that the FLE is not:

Carsland is an entire land based on ONE film (well, franchise I suppose). This has major implications for the long-term popularity, viability, and flexibility of the land. To be sure, there are advantages in the short term from a marketing, merchandising, and corporate synergy standpoint. But what about 20 years from now? Will it be popular? Will people still find the theme of "Carsland" compelling? Will all of the Cars characters and locations in Carsland keep the franchise alive, or will they date it horribly and render it stale? How do imagineers update the land and keep it fresh, without fundamentally changing its theme?

What if in 1955 Walt Disney decided to capitalize on the Davy Crockett merchandise craze and create an entire land called "Crockettland", instead of the broader and infinitely more flexible Frontierland?

Even worse - this penchant for devoting an entire land to the one franchise-of-the-moment seems to have taken hold of Disney management. A Bug's Land? Toy Story Land? Please Disney, just....stop. Whatever happened to long-range creative planning?

Don't get me wrong - I am absolutely fine with basing park attractions on Disney films (though often the best attractions have no movie tie-in). I am very excited for the two new FLE rides, and I think Radiator Springs will be awesome! I just wish it were located in a land that was more encompassing, evocative, and aspirational.

I have a 6 year old grandson who absolutely loves CARS. He has every car ever made and runs the "Piston Cup" Race all the time, complete with pitt stops, pitty cars and the trailers that haul the CARS. The fact that WDW just put McQueen and Mater in the back lot of Hollywood Studios is a disservice considering the fact they are building Radiator Springs in CA. I do not know why they are not putting something like that either in the Magic Kingdom or Hollywood to expand on this phenom in FL. I think they are missing the boat again as the new movie is set to come out and my grandson is intent on being the first one in to see the new movie. I must reiterate that he has been like this since he was 3 and has not lost one bit of interest, in fact, it has intensified if anything. I also hope WDW does not pass up the opportunity they have while renovating WDW to expand on Pixie Hollow as my 3 year old granddaughter could not get enough of Tink and the Fairies and that is another hot commodity. Disney can make or break any phenom they want at any time. The Little Mermaid is old news as is Rapunzel, but Disney has continued to make these relevant, oh and I forgot Beauty and the Beast. All of these Disney has continued to put in the forefront and CARS paraphenalia continues to be produced and flies off the shelves at toy stores. I can tell you this from experience. I just hope there is an extension for CARS in FL in the very near future as we are DVC members and will continue to take annual trips there for a very long time.

 

[JoClovesCARS]

I don't think that's entirely true. A few months ago Mr. Lasseter was out in MK's Fantasyland checking out the progress and talking to attractions managers, coordinators, and normal CMs. He walked around the whole area for a pretty long while, inspecting how construction was coming along. He looked excited and pleased with the way things were going. Lots of enthusiasm.

Unfortunately for me, he and my coworkers were across the walkway from me, and I was at a position in which you can't move more than five feet from your spot. :brick: So I got to watch all my friends meet and shake hands with him.



Definitely agree. One good thing about the FLE is that all its areas' themes have withstood the test of time. Dumbo remains an extremely popular ride, Snow White is still a household name, and TLM and BatB continue to be extremely well-known and well-loved movies 20+ years after their releases.

Cars makes money because little boys like racecars, but personally I have never really cared for the movie, and will probably care even less about it 20 years down the line. I actually don't think any movie should have its own land, for the Crockettland reason you mentioned. And if they had to make a movie-based land, Cars would not be one of the most deserving movies I would think of.

Obviously, you do not have any young male children around. My 6 year old grandson loves CARS, and knows every single word of the movie. If you actually watch and listen to the movie you will understand the resounding theme. This was about a selfish CAR, Lightning McQueen, who had no friends and didn't care about anyone else. Radiator Springs was a town he came upon and taught him all about what was important in life and also made a sour old racecar, Doc Hudson, not so bitter and come back to life. My grandson and I are both looking forward to the new movie and he watches all the shorts and reads all the books that have come from the movie. I might add, my 3 year old granddaughter also loves the movie and the cars and plays with them as well. the only reason the movies you name have stayed relevant is because Disney reissues them and continues to keep them relevant. Look at the importance of Tinkerbell recently. Why? They started making movies about her and created all these other fairies, and now little girls everywhere love her. After a recent trip to WDW it was very evident because the line to see Tink was 3 times longer than the line in Toontown tent to see the princesses.

 

[eilie]

Does it matter? There will be a great D ride and one hell of an E Ticket.

Do people care about Song of the South to ride Splash Mountain?

You make an excellent point and I agree with you. Splash Mountain is the perfect example of a ride than transcends the popularity of its franchise thanks to the sheer awesomeness of the attraction. This is also true of Mr. Toad (R.I.P.) and countless other examples in the theme parks (Jungle Cruise: True Life Adventures, anyone?). I think I'm just reacting against Disney's current over-reliance on franchises for new park attractions and lands, when some of their best work (POTC, HM, Future World circa 1980s-early 90s, Splash) didn't rely on a movie tie-in.

That having been said, I think Radiator Springs Racers and the other new rides in Cars Land will be absolutely amazing. I do believe that people will still enjoy RSR 20 years from now. The placemaking of RSR alone - with its stunning rockwork backdrop - is enough to get me on a plane to California in a couple years.

I am not so much concerned about the rides but rather the overall branding of the land. 20 years from now, will I still want to visit a land based on Route 66 nostalgia and the thrill of the open road? You bet! Will I still care about Luigi, Flo, or Sally (and her Cozy Cone Motel)? Eh...not so much. It's not that I think that the Cars characters don't belong. I'm concerned, rather, about the heavy-handed treatment of the details and placemaking in the rest of the land. Does everything need to be so specifically Cars-based? I wish Disney had designed the land in a more expansive way - one based on western highway culture and those by-gone days of kitschy family road trips, rather than only the Cars characters and places from the movie. Those characters would absolutely have a place in this land, as would other characters and ideas (heck, even Herbie could be involved!). Who knows what future ideas Disney might have for such a land. But now, their focus is too narrow to allow for much freedom in future expansion or renovation.

 

[TP2000]

Does it matter? There will be a great D ride and one hell of an E Ticket.

Two great D Ticket rides. Luigi's Flying Tires and Mater's Junkyard Jamboree both open in 2012, with Radiator Springs Racers mega-E Ticket.

Luigi's Flying Tires - Cars Land

Do people care about Song of the South to ride Splash Mountain?

Perfect analogy! Song of the South is a movie the Company doesn't even want to admit it owns, and yet it's characters and plot play host to one of the most popular E Tickets they've ever added to their parks around the world.

 

[TP2000]

What if in 1955 Walt Disney decided to capitalize on the Davy Crockett merchandise craze and create an entire land called "Crockettland", instead of the broader and infinitely more flexible Frontierland?

I see your point, and yet I don't see the inherent danger you do in pinning a theme to one character or movie property.

Disneyland still operates its Davy Crockett Explorer Canoes ride year-round, it's still popular, the CM's working the ride still dress in buckskin outfits with coonskin caps like Davy Crockett, and there's still a line for the canoe ride in the 21st century. But most folks have very little emotional attachment to Davy Crockett now.

If a ride is fun, it's fun, no matter who the copyrighted character attached to it is.

 

[danstadnik]

Utterly pointless thread that makes a pointless comparisson.

Sorry if I wasted your time! I didn't mean to offend anyone. I'll be the first to admit I'm no expert in this, I just enjoy the conversation.
And Martin, its an honor to have you in on the discussion, I've enjoyed your videos for years!:sohappy:

 

[eilie]

I see your point, and yet I don't see the inherent danger you do in pinning a theme to one character or movie property.

Disneyland still operates its Davy Crockett Explorer Canoes ride year-round, it's still popular, the CM's working the ride still dress in buckskin outfits with coonskin caps like Davy Crockett, and there's still a line for the canoe ride in the 21st century. But most folks have very little emotional attachment to Davy Crockett now.

If a ride is fun, it's fun, no matter who the copyrighted character attached to it is.

I absolutely agree with you regarding a ride's theme. The particular movie tie-in is ultimately irrelevant to the quality and enduring popularity of any given ride.

For what it's worth, I wasn't trying to criticize the Davy Crockett franchise. I love those Davy Crockett Canoes! I love both the history behind them and the sheer joy of actually getting to help row the canoe. Classic Disneyland at its best. I wish we had those canoes in WDW.

But that's not really my point. I only really have a problem with such a specific theme being applied across an entire LAND of a (relatively land-locked) theme park. I feel that it limits the future potential for fresh new attractions or sub-themes within that area of the park. The Davy Crockett Canoes are one attraction among many that fit within DL's broadly-defined Frontierland.

That's really my only criticism of Cars Land. I think it's going to be awesome, and it represents a major turning point at DCA. I can't wait to see it.

 

[TP2000]

I'll be the first to admit I'm no expert in this, I just enjoy the conversation.

It is an interesting topic, and one that is a natural for comparison because the projects are similarly sized physically (if not fiscally) and originally were slated to open around the same time in 2012.

With the scrapping of the M&G's and adding the mine coaster, the timetable for FLE now seems to be drawn out in smaller phases through early 2014 instead of the 2012 opening originally stated. But the scale and scope of each project is still ripe with comparison.

Cars Land will open all at once in June, 2012, and it will be this instant huge addition to the park on virgin expansion property. BOOM!, it's open so book now and come see it!

The marketing impact of that will be huge for DCA and the Disneyland Resort as a whole.

I do have to wonder how WDW management is going to market the FLE additions as they dribble in over an 18 month period from mid 2012 to early 2014. The big thing is Mermaid, followed by the mine coaster, and then the Beauty & The Beast restaurant complex. Those three things that all open at different times are worthy of marketing dollars. The rest of it, not so much, and nothing you could build a marketing campaign around.

It's a shame all of FLE doesn't open all at once in one big marketing reveal, even if that meant pushing it all back to Summer, 2013.

 

[eilie]

It's a shame all of FLE doesn't open all at once in one big marketing reveal, even if that meant pushing it all back to Summer, 2013.

Agreed. I think the phased openings of the FLE present challenges not only from a marketing perspective but from a logistical one as well. The presence of a rather massive construction zone right in the middle of the expansion for 2 years (the future Seven Dwarfs Mine Train) seems particularly problematic. Imagine all of the nosie, the visual intrusions, and the operational headaches (Little Mermaid at a dead end behind the construction, etc.) from that. It wouldn't be nearly so difficult if the last phase of the project (Seven Dwarfs) wasn't the one in front of everything else. Should be an interesting couple of years. (Too bad we don't have a great of a view of the construction like DCA has from the Mickey Wheel).

I wonder what the Seven Dwarfs land will look like when the first phase opens in the FLE. Will Disney do some quick landscaping so they can take down the construction walls temporarily? Or will they have already started on construction of the Mine Train?

 

[marni1971]

And Martin, its an honor to have you in on the discussion, I've enjoyed your videos for years!:sohappy:

Stop it. I`m blushing.

But thank you! :wave: