easyrowrdw
Well-Known Member
No, it’s not.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Dreamer19
Active Member
Exactly. It’s not iconic at all, nor will it be. Disney has made choices these last few years and most of the time, the choice has been the “easy way” and it’s often at the cost of the greatness that came before it.
Despite being in a certain time period, ROA, the riverboat and the island are timeless.
Can anyone say that Tiana’s Bayou Adventure will stand the test of time in the way that Splash Mountain did? What about Walking to thunder mountain with the sound of the steamboat whistle in the background while the sun sets?
Man, I hope those cars are silent…
Dreamer19
Active Member
I know that if Disney had been more responsible with their businesses, they might have had the money to build a fifth gate. Or perhaps they could have just expanded beyond the railroad as they had in DL for Galaxy’s Edge.
Dreamer19
Active Member
If that was the case, I would be a lot happier as a Disney Shareholder….
HMF
Well-Known Member
Mostly because they know they would have a riot on their hands if they tried to get rid of the river at Disneyland.
But why the issue with Cars? It's perhaps LESS square-peg-round-holeing than some of the more recent IP integrations. Piston Peak (a Cars adjacent property)
Dreamer19
Active Member
Does it always have to be IP? Can’t they take chances?
There is a fantastic ride at Hong Kong Disneyland called Big Grizzly Mountain Runaway Mine Cars. It is one of the best rides I’ve ever ridden at a Disney Park, it’s got a wholesome-yet-fun story and beyond all of that, it’s ORIGINAL.
When I worked at Shanghai Disney, I rode the backstage bus with an Imagineer and I found out that he had worked on that ride and to hear the love and effort and imagination put in….
THAT is what I want from Disney.
HMF
Well-Known Member
Not as long as Iger is CEO.
I'd prefer that they not of course but that also wasn't the question asked. My question in particular was why is Cars so bad, what makes it such a hangup for some people? Genuinely curious.
Dreamer19
Active Member
Cars is a great property and I think it works really well in DCA, where they had the space. At MK in the location they’re putting it, I don’t think it works at all. I cringe thinking of how it’ll clash….similar to the Big Blue Box at Epcot.
If they hide them from view it’ll be better, but still very strange. Theres a hundred other things they could put in between the frontier and the “bayou” that would make more sense.
So it's not the IP? It's the location?
Can you elaborate on why you think it'll clash? It's borrowing elements from Fronterland's past, TSI bridges, ROA water features, etc. If the IP itself, how is it any more or less fantastical than other anthropomorphised characters already featured in MK?
Last edited:
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Because if you trying to emphasize the beauty and majesty of the national parks and nature, putting the emphasis on mechanical modern vehicles - specifically ones that require some level of destruction of nature to make the paths/roads they drive on - isn't a good way to do that. I don't have any problem with Cars as a property used well - I would have been happy with Cars Land in DHS or some variation of using them there - but Frontierland isn't the right place. I might even be okay with putting Cars in MK in a separate corner/land detached from the other parts of MK but I think this is a poor choice for how to use that IP in WDW.
If they wanted a national parks theme and they wanted that location, I think that using something like Chip & Dale or Humphrey the Bear would be a better way to do it.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
At Disneyland? Star Wars was basically all new land (yes, the petting zoo went away but that was a tiny part of the footprint). MMRR was new. The 2 additional Marvel rides are going on currently unused land. Coco appears to not be replacing any other attractions.
DLR sometimes replaces as well of course but the ratio of "addition" to "replacement" is much better than at WDW in the Iger era.
Dreamer19
Active Member
Yeah, it isn’t the IP. I honestly have so many thoughts about what goes where at Disney Parks over the last decade that I don’t know that anyone would want to hear it.
Not a Universal shill by any means, but I can point to something like Epic Universe and know instantly that they got theming right. Everything has its place.
Ten years from now, if they wedge a Fast & The Furious attraction into Nintendo Land or Isle Of Berk, believe me, I will make comments.
Sure to some degree, but the IP represents the era of the late 1950s and 60s, which marked a significant boom in road trip vacations, including those through iconic drives like Route 66 and with day trips to the Grand Canyon and National Parks. The idea of the IP here and tieing in with Piston Peak (an IP-adjacent property) only serves to better solidify that concept. I dare say the use is smarter here than Tiana in Frontierland. Though to your point with regards to Humpery and Chip & Dale... these characters would fit in nicely and probably should be featured in the "land" as well.
DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
I think part of it is that the audience for Cars, to my mind, tends to skew young. So it would be a little like having a Doc McStuffins land (or maybe Hotwheels land, if that was a Disney IP)… my guess is that the appeal for the Cars IP is a bit less universal. Like I said, I think it would be great for something like Tomorrowland Speedway (I mean aside from the fact that Cars isn’t set in the future, but is a speedway particularly futuristic anyways?) but not as a heart-of-the-park centerpiece.
Exactly. The IP was featured on Pull-ups. So it's the perfect vehicle for a Magic Kingdom attraction - the defacto "kiddy" park.
To be fair, I'm almost certain people poo-pooed the idea of Cars in California Adventure too and look how that turned out. It's certainly universally-loved there.
Full disclosure: I was for this concept from the beginning. Only until recently did I have even more faith in the project showing how they've best managed to save a sliver or ROA and some of TSI's exploration features. And I do think the IP works well here. And it's not a cloned attraction!!! But I'm biased. It is nice to get a pulse on what others think pro or against. I just hope as fans we're not moving the goal post.
Last edited:
HMF
Well-Known Member
To be fair, It really only works so well in DCA is because when it opened that park was a joke.
DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
I definitely see that perspective but to my mind the most “kiddy” parts of the park should not make up the core framework. Or if they do they should have crossover appeal. Like the castle - it’s appealing to princess loving preschoolers, but castles are also something adults tour Europe to see.
I’m not entirely convinced that a scenic Cars backdrop will be a little meh, but I’m skeptical. We’ll see how the final product looks.
That's my beef with Villains in MK. So I get where you're coming from. But I just don't have an issue with this IP in MK.
