News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom

[Brer Oswald]

Why is the current version of Frontierland problematic? What’s left that could possibly be deemed problematic? Because it’s a land themed to an Old Western town? Runaway mine cars? Is it just an offensive aesthetic because it might remind people of mid 20th century Americas fascination with Western movies and Cowboys and Indians? If so that’s pretty weak. What am I missing?

I guarantee it’s just because they don’t have a ton of modern IPs they can naturally plop into the land.

 

[MattyBear]

Haven’t read all the comments, but was curious on how you would get beyond big thunder. Maybe you would go underneath the train station and access to the new land through there?

 

[britain]

Also, just because it is a villain’s land, why can’t there be heroes present in the rides? It’s one of the things I hate about the new land idea. It’s too limiting.

Excellent suggestion! Go ahead and make a “dark” corner of Fantasyland, but the attractions’ stories should essentially be more typical Fantasyland attractions - at least the way they used to be. Snow White’s Scary Adventures would have fit perfectly there. That boat has sailed, but Pinocchio’s Daring Journey as it exists in Disneyland would fit in a dark corner. Create a Hercules attraction where 90% of the time Herc is fighting underworld monsters. Or help the 101 dalmatians escape from DeVille Manor.

The classic formula works.

Could you even… dare I say it… bring back Toad!?

 

[Dcgc28]

That's the problem I have with all of this. They are going all in to kill any theme each park had at one point. Each park felt unique and different. Now it's all about getting E-ticket IP where ever they can regardless if it fits the park.

I don't entirely agree, but it is bitter sweet to see the park we fell in love with change so much.

That being said the kids going to the current day parks will feel the way we do when they're older and it's changing on them.

 

[The Leader of the Club]

I don't entirely agree, but it is bitter sweet to see the park we fell in love with change so much.

That being said the kids going to the current day parks will feel the way we do when they're older and it's changing on them.

Case in point, my nostalgia for the old Sorcerer Hat at DHS.

 

[britain]

“But my nostalgia is more important than your nostalgia!”

 

[UNCgolf]

As mentioned previously, MK is fantastical where DAK places more weight on realism. It’s the same difference between EPCOT Germany and Fantasyland, the EPCOT Outpost and DAK Africa, DHS Hollywood/Sunset BLVDs and Main Street USA, World Discovery and Tomorrowland. There are a ton of ways they can differentiate the lands and make them distinct.

Not if they want to capture the look of Coco, though. Coco is set in a realistic Spanish colonial town, which is similar to the concept art for DAK.

Obviously the Land of the Dead is different, but I don't think they can actually build that -- and it would be incongruous with the surroundings if it's supposed to be part of an expansion of Frontierland.

Again, though, if it's just a Coco ride with a single facade that will be different than a whole mini-land.

 

[mickEblu]

Why was Toontown problematic? Why was the original Fantasyland problematic? Why was the sorcerers hat problematic at DHS?

Sometimes things change and there isn't some devious decision behind that choice. Sometimes it's just time to update or move on, Frontierland is very very boring aside from it's two rides, so it makes sense that it would be updated or moved on from. That's it, nothing more. Nothing less.

My fault maybe for not quoting the post? I have now quoted for your reference below. If he would have just stopped at the land is the most restrictive of the four big lands I could maybe agree with your comparison. But the fact that he refers to “the romanticized and whitewashed fairytale of our nations westward expansion is inherently problematic” implies that it’s at least part of the reason it’s being considered or should be considered to be rethemed or tweaked. And again my question is what about the current iteration of Frontierland could possibly be considered “problematic?”

On Frontierland and BBTM:

As currently executed, FL is by far the most restrictive of the four "big" MK lands. It's central source material - a romanticized and whitewashed fairytale of our nation's westward expansion - is inherently problematic. With a relatively minor tweak of style and storytelling, this area could be recast as a celebration of the natural beauty and ethos of this region. By focusing on a more natural setting for BBTM, you can help preserve the heart and vibe of FL.

 

[PREMiERdrum]

My fault maybe for not quoting the post? I have now quoted for your reference below. If he would have just stopped at the land is the most restrictive of the four big lands I could maybe agree with your comparison. But the fact that he refers to “the romanticized and whitewashed fairytale of our nations westward expansion is inherently problematic” implies that it’s at least part of the reason it’s being considered or should be considered to be rethemed or tweaked. And again my question is what about the current iteration of Frontierland could possibly be considered “problematic?”

I didn't foresee the powder keg that followed that comment and worry further discussion would derail the thread. The move towards the natural west and away from 1950s "cowboys and Indians trope has been afoot for a decade or more.

DMs are open, FWIW.

 

[James Alucobond]

Not if they want to capture the look of Coco, though. Coco is set in a realistic Spanish colonial town, which is similar to the concept art for DAK.

Obviously the Land of the Dead is different, but I don't think they can actually build that -- and it would be incongruous with the surroundings if it's supposed to be part of an expansion of Frontierland.

Again, though, if it's just a Coco ride with a single facade that will be different than a whole mini-land.

You just lean into the churchyard, cemetery, and mausoleum elements as the major features of the area and throw a restaurant and shop across the way. I think you also lean toward browns and oranges (and obviously tons of marigolds) as the main color scheme in BBTM, leaving the purples, pinks, and deeper reds to Tropical Americas. The flora would also obviously differ significantly.

 

[mickEblu]

I didn't foresee the powder keg that followed that comment and worry further discussion would derail the thread. The move towards the natural west and away from 1950s "cowboys and Indians trope has been afoot for a decade or more.

DMs are open, FWIW.

Haha @powder keg. Well that’s my point. There are no Cowboys to be found. The Native Americans (at Disneyland at least) are along the ROA and go with the more natural west theme that you re talking about. Is there something inherently offensive about a saloon and an old western town? Disclaimer- haven’t been to MK. Just a long time DL pass holder.

 

[Dcgc28]

My fault maybe for not quoting the post? I have now quoted for your reference below. If he would have just stopped at the land is the most restrictive of the four big lands I could maybe agree with your comparison. But the fact that he refers to “the romanticized and whitewashed fairytale of our nations westward expansion is inherently problematic” implies that it’s at least part of the reason it’s being considered or should be considered to be rethemed or tweaked. And again my question is what about the current iteration of Frontierland could possibly be considered “problematic?”

Ah yes my apologies then. I agree with you, that Frontierland from an ideological stand point is not at all problematic and that my original response to you is the reason why it's changing.

Sorry if I came off overly harsh, I should've assumed a conversation was already happening.

 

[mickEblu]

Ah yes my apologies then. I agree with you, that Frontierland from an ideological stand point is not at all problematic and that my original response to you is the reason why it's changing.

Sorry if I came off overly harsh, I should've assumed a conversation was already happening.

No worries. My fault for not quoting the post. Really wasn’t looking to make it a big thing.

 

[celluloid]

Who says there aren't heroes in the villain land? I thought the entire idea is that WE the parkgoers would faceoff against the Disney villains in the attractions, and maybe the heroic characters from the movie might make a cameo to assist. But the idea is that the park guests are the heroes.

Then you take the cool factor away from them. The coolness of villians is that people love to hate them.

If you relate to the villain too much or on their side, you lose the cool factor.

If you face off or experience the peril that the villains cause, then that is the strength of a well-designed attraction based on a film's story elsewhere.

The idea EVERYWHERE is that a park guest is a hero in a theme park. Visceral feelings of adventure and peril, then the celebration finale or outcome.

If a villain's ride has a hero assisting you, or you as the hero. How is that different from an attraction that could be anywhere in the park and why does it compliment or ask for a land based Soley on villains? Limiting and homogenizing, which is a problem Disney theme parks have had.

In Star Tours since day one, you are in the shoes of someone like Luke Skywalker, innocently exploring and called to adventure. C3PO and R2D2 are there as supporting roles the same way they would be to a protagonist. You face off with the Villains.

Back to the Future, you were in the role of a Marty McFly and Biff Tannen you directly face off/stop.

Splash Mountain, you viscerally felt the same things that Brer Fox felt through the story of him tricking Brer Fox and Brer Bear and the uncertainty when they finally almost got him.

Snow White's Scary Adventures and its incarnations before that featured the villian to give it a retelling balance and thrill of the story in the type of spookhouse dark ride attraction it was.

Alien Encounter. You were the victim of sinister events from corporate greed and a creature.



Great Movie Ride. You were in the movies and had to face a situation with a gangster/bandit.

Fantasmic would not be nearly as impactful with only the villains. What you are saying is contradictory. There are experiences where we could side with the villains, which would be odd, and/or experiences where we assist or fill the roles of a hero stopping the villains, like a good theme park attraction emulating major events of a well-known story should be.

In Guardians of the Galaxy's attractions, you are with the heroes.

Dr. Doom's Fearfall is an attraction where you are volunteering to help the villain, but ultimately the entire thing is themed to sketch and him not caring for your well being and wants you in danger and afraid. He is still a villain. Something like this can work, but the entire Marvel Superhero Island being villains only, and Marvel has some of the coolest villains, would not really make a great impact. Doom Alley is a gritty villain area of the entire land with one attraction where the over the top villain gets to remain so.

Disney has some of the greatest villains of all time. Gaston's works in a similar sense of the balance Dr. Doom's Fear Fall has. The villain is something that exists in that world of good that knows better and that's what makes them a great antagonist.

I am in no way saying Villains land is not happening. Nor would it be uncool to see(although MK is a little odd as it should just be an extension of Fantasyland, but Bob Iger has not given a care to the American Mythos of castle parks) It is just does not create the strongest impact of an overreaching land's premise.

It seems like a direct knee jerk reaction to Monsters Dark Universe land to have something akin to respond with.

The major difference, pointed earlier is that Disney villains are very melodramatic bad guys. Easy to boo, his and hope they fail because of what they always stand for.

Most of Universal's monsters are misunderstood or victims of circumstance. The humans are often the villains.
Dracula is typically the sole antagonist of the monster world by the end of a story.

@EPCOT-O.G. To go back to answer a question you posed earlier and oversimplified a bit. A world of Gods and Monsters is not exactly the same as direct Good vs Evil protagonist and Antagonist.

 

[haveyoumetmark]

That's the problem I have with all of this. They are going all in to kill any theme each park had at one point. Each park felt unique and different. Now it's all about getting E-ticket IP where ever they can regardless if it fits the park.

I see the argument but on the other hand, folks interpretation of park themes is way too literal and rigid. Disney does go to some length to have things fit rather than indiscriminately plopping them down as is often characterized.

 

[Jrb1979]

I see the argument but on the other hand, folks interpretation of park themes is way too literal and rigid. Disney does go to some length to have things fit rather than indiscriminately plopping them down as is often characterized.

For some things I agree they do. What they have done to Epcot is criminal. I have always wished they went back and finished to original plans for World Showcase instead of trying to fit IP into Epcot

 

[celluloid]

I see the argument but on the other hand, folks interpretation of park themes is way too literal and rigid. Disney does go to some length to have things fit rather than indiscriminately plopping them down as is often characterized.

Its becoming less and less of something they care about.

We are talking about a theme park that when improved upon had an under level of Utility so that unsightly and out of place things could be efficiently moved without clashing the guests.

It used to be The Disney Difference. You can bend the rules creatively, but outright making a land just to fit some E tickets without the background and retheming things elsewhere is odd.

As much as I think Indy is too little too late and odd for animals to get over excited about. Tropical Americas makes sense as a cohesive theme. You can have adventure, peril and dangers and some ancient animal that Indy should care about but does not yet until the adventure. animals of fiction and reality can still be the focus for Animal Kingdom's sake.

That has a balance of heros, dangers, villains etc is not as good in a land of just villians starring. And goes against what the plaque was since Disneyland, as did Galaxy's Edge.

It is not that the attractions individually will be awful or that cool things can't come of it. But it's not really as impactful and certainly not to the standard set by themselves before.

 

[mickEblu]

Why are assuming that a Villains land would be lacking conflict or any clashes with hero’s?

The opportunity to botch a villains land is high but it can be great if executed well. It shouldn’t be a home for ALL the villains. I’m picturing Maleficent’s castle as the centerpiece surrounded by a dark forest. Included would be villains like Maleficent, Chernabog, the Wicked Witch, the Headless Horseman and the Horned King. In other words, the villains that would feel right in that setting and (by looking at this list) also happen to be the darkest of all the villains. Gaston or Scar wouldn’t fit in. Neither would Jafar but he should be saved for a proper Aladdin attraction dark ride anyway. Ursula is in the sea and has enough representation. The Queen of Hearts, Cruella or Captain Hook wouldn’t fit the tone of what I’m picturing either.

This would work very much how Fantasyland at Disneyland works. All the IP fits with the setting of the land. With all of that said I could see room for some of the villains I excluded in a well thought out E ticket. Just not out and about or having their own attractions.

 

[James Alucobond]

Then you take the cool factor away from them. The coolness of villians is that people love to hate them.

If you relate to the villain too much or on their side, you lose the cool factor.

If you face off or experience the peril that the villains cause, then that is the strength of a well-designed attraction based on a film's story elsewhere.

The idea EVERYWHERE is that a park guest is a hero in a theme park. Visceral feelings of adventure and peril, then the celebration finale or outcome.

If a villain's ride has a hero assisting you, or you as the hero. How is that different from an attraction that could be anywhere in the park and why does it compliment or ask for a land based Soley on villains? Limiting and homogenizing, which is a problem Disney theme parks have had.

In Star Tours since day one, you are in the shoes of someone like Luke Skywalker, innocently exploring and called to adventure. C3PO and R2D2 are there as supporting roles the same way they would be to a protagonist. You face off with the Villains.

Back to the Future, you were in the role of a Marty McFly and Biff Tannen you directly face off/stop.

Splash Mountain, you viscerally felt the same things that Brer Fox felt through the story of him tricking Brer Fox and Brer Bear and the uncertainty when they finally almost got him.

Snow White's Scary Adventures and its incarnations before that featured the villian to give it a retelling balance and thrill of the story in the type of spookhouse dark ride attraction it was.

Alien Encounter. You were the victim of sinister events from corporate greed and a creature.



Great Movie Ride. You were in the movies and had to face a situation with a gangster/bandit.

Fantasmic would not be nearly as impactful with only the villains. What you are saying is contradictory. There are experiences where we could side with the villains, which would be odd, and/or experiences where we assist or fill the roles of a hero stopping the villains, like a good theme park attraction emulating major events of a well-known story should be.

In Guardians of the Galaxy's attractions, you are with the heroes.

Dr. Doom's Fearfall is an attraction where you are volunteering to help the villain, but ultimately the entire thing is themed to sketch and him not caring for your well being and wants you in danger and afraid. He is still a villain. Something like this can work, but the entire Marvel Superhero Island being villains only, and Marvel has some of the coolest villains, would not really make a great impact. Doom Alley is a gritty villain area of the entire land with one attraction where the over the top villain gets to remain so.

Disney has some of the greatest villains of all time. Gaston's works in a similar sense of the balance Dr. Doom's Fear Fall has. The villain is something that exists in that world of good that knows better and that's what makes them a great antagonist.

I am in no way saying Villains land is not happening. Nor would it be uncool to see(although MK is a little odd as it should just be an extension of Fantasyland, but Bob Iger has not given a care to the American Mythos of castle parks) It is just does not create the strongest impact of an overreaching land's premise.

It seems like a direct knee jerk reaction to Monsters Dark Universe land to have something akin to respond with.

The major difference, pointed earlier is that Disney villains are very melodramatic bad guys. Easy to boo, his and hope they fail because of what they always stand for.

Most of Universal's monsters are misunderstood or victims of circumstance. The humans are often the villains.
Dracula is typically the sole antagonist of the monster world by the end of a story.

@EPCOT-O.G. To go back to answer a question you posed earlier and oversimplified a bit. A world of Gods and Monsters is not exactly the same as direct Good vs Evil protagonist and Antagonist.

I think there are some pretty straightforward plot devices that can circumvent this. For instance, suppose the plot of a ride is simply “steal something from villain’s lair, villain or villain henchbeast detects and pursues you, escape”. That isn’t all that different from, say, Dinosaur.

 

[celluloid]

I think there are some pretty straightforward plot devices that can circumvent this. For instance, suppose the plot of a ride is simply “steal something from villain’s lair, villain or villain henchbeast detects and pursues you, escape”. That isn’t all that different from, say, Dinosaur.

This is true. The difference is. And that is a great way to add emotional catalyst and psychological thrill.
Other than real estate, why would that be out of place in Fantasyland?

And can one attraction like that make an entire land? Look what the thought against Dinosaur became. Of all things to compare it to. Even Diagon Alley does this and has the light and dark elements of that property. But the entire land is not death eaters.