MK Villains Land Announced for Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom

[Purduevian]

I have a feeling like whatever that E-Ticket Avengers ride in DCA is might be what the other Villains ride is here.
I think Avengers is supposed be very screen heavy, so hopefully they use that vehicle and screen tech, but with a good mixture of physical and AA in the Villains ride, if that is what it is. Like Monsters Unchained. Good mixture of AA, physical and screen--with the AA/physical sets being more heavy.

Wonder if they would pull a "countdown to extinction" and even try to re-use the same layout, but with a different theme.

 

[Nickm2022]

Isn't it basically another "park the riders in front of a screen multiple times" ride? Yeah, I'm good on attractions like that.

It's really not. Like it's hard to explain but trust me when I say while it has screens it is simply one of the best and most engrossing rides I've ever been on

 

[denyuntilcaught]

Isn't it basically another "park the riders in front of a screen multiple times" ride? Yeah, I'm good on attractions like that.

It's absolutely not that.

 

[BrianLo]

Spider-Man is the only time thus far that ride system or Disney's version has actually resulted in a quality attraction, and I don't even rate Spider-Man as highly as others.

What other installations are you referring to beyond Spiderman, Spider-Pan, Jurassic and Transformers? 2/4 is fairly good and seems to speak to attraction execution rather than the system itself.

Transformers is also fairly well done, it’s probably just the Michael Bay of it all rather than the broader execution. I haven’t done Jurassic, I have pacing criticisms, but that one also seems well regarded.

I’m not sure if legend of Nuwa is exactly scoop. But no one seems to be aware of the Fantawild brand. Have any other park providers done them yet that I’m overlooking?

 

[lazyboy97o]

What other installations are you referring to beyond Spiderman, Spider-Pan, Jurassic and Transformers? 2/4 is fairly good and seems to speak to attraction execution rather than the system itself.

Transformers is also fairly well done, it’s probably just the Michael Bay of it all rather than the broader execution. I haven’t done Jurassic, I have pacing criticisms, but that one also seems well regarded.

I’m not sure if legend of Nuwa is exactly scoop. But no one seems to be aware of the Fantawild brand. Have any other park providers done them yet that I’m overlooking?

Curse of DarKastle at Busch Gardens Williamsburg. It used Oceaneering’s imitations of the SCOOP vehicle, Evolution.

The various Justice League rides at Six Flags use the Evo 6 ride vehicle which is supposed to be a smaller, more budget friendly version of the Evolution ride vehicle.

 

[BrianLo]

Curse of DarKastle at Busch Gardens Williamsburg. It used Oceaneering’s imitations of the SCOOP vehicle, Evolution.

The various Justice League rides at Six Flags use the Evo 6 ride vehicle which is supposed to be a smaller, more budget friendly version of the Evolution ride vehicle.

Thanks! I’m such a fan of Spider-Man/Pan that I’m happily willing to see what Scott and team are able to achieve with Avengers.

I can’t share enough enthusiasm that Pan resolves its conflict and then just chews the scenery for another 2 minutes. Such a refreshing take.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Curse of DarKastle at Busch Gardens Williamsburg. It used Oceaneering’s imitations of the SCOOP vehicle, Evolution.

When it opened it with effects working it was great! Only got to ride it a couple times and I’m sad they gave up on it.

 

[mickEblu]

On the surface, Villains Land is about the juiciest Imagineering project I can imagine. They get to play with some of the company's most popular and "cool" IP without having to do a "take-what's-on-the-screen-and-just-build-it" approach...which means they can be creative.

But like SWGE, the expectations are sky high and different fans are going to expect wildly different things, and everybody thinks their vision is "no brainer."

• If they make the land too pristine (because so many of the characters are rich and live pampered lives), a lot of guests are going to think it feels too nice, too sweet, and not nearly dark enough, tonally. They'll say Disney played it safe, pulled their punches, couldn't "go all the way" with a dark-vibe land.
• If they make it decrepit and crumbling in order to convey the characters' decrepit morals (and to make it feel a bit edgy and spooky in ways that are both stereotypical but visceral), fans will say that doesn't make sense, it's too obvious, it's cheesy.
• If they make it a singular "town" of sorts, with all the villains as inhabitants, many will say "this is another Batuu, a place we're not invested in and never needed to go to."
• If they keep each villain separated into distinct thematic areas, many fans who wanted an immersive destination to visit with strong placemaking will feel like they're instead strolling through a checkbox-marketplace of Disney IPs: unengaging, transactional, perfunctory.

These incredibly difficult creative choices for a five-year, billion-dollar project are playing out in an era where disagreement, debate, and pushback are anathema in corporate America. Everybody -- bosses and employees -- are in conflict-avoidance mode. lf a person risks pointing out the weakness of an idea in a meeting -- regardless of whatever gentle, qualified-language tip-toeing and "compliment sandwiches" they employ -- they can be reported to HR for being toxic and emotionally abusive. (I think socially, culturally, this is one of the key reasons we are seeing so much garbage out of corporate entertainment lately...bad ideas are not getting shut down).

As excited as I am, I'm concerned. Whether or not I'll ultimately be disappointed, who knows. But a lot of people will be, and there is likely going to be a lot of negative reaction to whatever they do.

Nice post. I think the solution is to create a visually striking land with a nice blend of the dark rock work we see in the concept art balanced out by beautiful architecture and thematically appropriate landscaping/ trees. The tone should be PG-13. No different cheesy little mini lands for different characters. The characters only coexist together on the dark ride because (insert clever story).

 

[jah4955]

The tone should be PG-13.

I can't see anything "DisneyParks" getting away with being more than "PG." I always saw Universal as the "PG-13" park (for comparison, I see Vegas is the R/NC-17 site...but I've never been/never plan to go lol). But then again, we're getting Cars, so anything is possible!

 

[mickEblu]

I can't see anything Disney getting away with being more than "PG." I always saw Universal as the "PG-13" attraction (for comparison, Vegas is the R/NC-17 site)...but never been/never plan to go lol). But then again, we're getting Cars, so anything is possible!

Disney has made plenty of PG 13 movies. A quick google search brought up movies like Cruella and Eddie Murphy’s Haunted Mansion. By PG 13 i mean something that has just a bit of darkness/ edge. Not cheesy like that new Villains show at DHS. Think Return to Oz which funny enough was rated PG back in 1985.

 

[LittleBuford]

The tone should be PG-13.

Why would we expect that of Disney? It would be tonally out of keeping with the parks as well as with the films from which the villains originate.

 

[mickEblu]

Why would we expect that of Disney? It would be tonally out of keeping with the parks as well as with the films from which the villains originate.

Not sure what you think PG 13 means? Eddie Murphy’s Haunted Mansion was PG 13

 

[LittleBuford]

Not sure what you think PG 13 means? Eddie Murphy’s Haunted Mansion was PG 13

“Parental Guidance: Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.”

That isn’t what I think of when I think of Disney.

 

[mickEblu]

“Parental Guidance: Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.”

That isn’t what I think of when I think of Disney.

You have to use your imagination a bit to understand what PG 13 would mean in. Theme park enivormment. I’m taking about setting, tone etc. Not nudity and profanity lol. Maybe PG 13 was the wrong term for people who takes things literally.

 

[LittleBuford]

You have to use your imagination a bit to understand what PG 13 would mean in. Theme park enivormment. I’m taking about setting, tone etc. Not nudity and profanity lol. Maybe PG 13 was the wrong for word for people who takes things literally.

I didn’t mention nudity or profanity, so I’m not sure why implying that I had some wildly exaggerated notion of what constitutes PG-13.

I took you to be saying that you would like the land to have the sort of tone one associates with elements of Universal—something that would appeal most naturally to teenagers and young adults. But since I’m apparently at fault for taking your words at face value, I don’t know what you actually meant!

 

[mickEblu]

I didn’t mention nudity or profanity, so I’m not sure why implying that I had some wildly exaggerated notion of what constitutes PG-13.

I took you to be saying that you would like the land to have the sort of tone one associates with elements of Universal—something that would appeal most naturally to teenagers and young adults. But since I’m apparently at fault for taking your words at face value, I don’t know what you actually meant!

If by Universal you mean Horror nights I would say that’s very much Rated R.

 

[mickEblu]

I didn’t mention nudity or profanity, so I’m not sure why implying that I had some wildly exaggerated notion of what constitutes PG-13.

I took you to be saying that you would like the land to have the sort of tone one associates with elements of Universal—something that would appeal most naturally to teenagers and young adults. But since I’m apparently at fault for taking your words at face value, I don’t know what you actually meant!

Ok so then if not nudity or profanity what about a PG 13 movie translated into a theme park tone/ environment would be inappropriate for a theme park setting? What in Cruella, Disney’s Jungle Cruise or Eddie’s Haunted Mansion would you say would not be kid friendly?

 

[LittleBuford]

Ok so then if not nudity or profanity what about a PG 13 movie translated into a theme park tone/ environment would be inappropriate for a theme park setting?

I didn’t say it would be inappropriate; I said it would be tonally off. But that was based on my understanding of what you meant by the term, which may not actually reflect your intention.

What in Cruella, Disney’s Jungle Cruise or Eddie’s Haunted Mansion would you say would not be kid friendly?

I’ve only seen the first two, and I don’t recall them well enough to know why they would have been given that rating.

We may just be speaking at cross-purposes here. To clarify my position, I would like the land to have the same level of intensity as we see in the darker segments of Fantasmic. That to me is the Disney way of doing scary (which it to say Not So Scary).

 

[Stupido]

I dunno, Disney has been proving themselves to be a bit more open to their Adult market. Over the past five years we've gotten an adults only space in Epcot, a bar in Magic Kingdom, and Jollywood Nights which has a much more adult menu/vibe than Very Merriest. With all of these additions I don't think a PG-13 setting for the villians land would be tonally out of place, and anything less would kill the hype for a villians experience. Could this be too much for kids? Sure, but isn't that the whole point of villains? They're supposed to be scary.

This land also has the opportunity to diversify the Magic Kingdom, and address those teens who think the Magic Kingdom is lame and would rather be home playing video games or at Universal. I'm sure many families would be grateful if there was a land that got those "too cool" kids excited for their trip to Magic Kingdom. Plus, with the addition of a heavy kids land (Cars), the young ones will still have plenty to look forward to.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

We may just be speaking at cross-purposes here. To clarify my position, I would like the land to have the same level of intensity as we see in the darker segments of Fantasmic. That to me is the Disney way of doing scary (which it to say Not So Scary).

I feel I understand the point you're making. They once tried to go more PG13 at MK with Alien Encounter and it didn't work out. Disney's version of scary, particularly at Magic Kingdom, is more the kind of humorous/light scary you find at Haunted Mansion. It would be tonally weird to cast villains from Disney animated features in a land and attractions at the Magic Kingdom that felt threatening in anything more than a fun way.