News Coco Boat Ride Coming to Disney California Adventure

[DrStarlander]

I can’t tell if you’re joking or not, but my guess is that is not happening. Had that been part of the plans because it’s so iconic it would have been announced already.

No, I'm not joking.

View-of-attraction restaurants have been included many times in Disney parks: Blue Bayou (x4, with different names), San Angel Inn, Coral Reef, Garden Grill, Pinocchio Village Haus at Magic Kingdom...

They have also, in recent years, built some elaborate/immersive dining locations in the parks like Space 220 and Beak & Barrel.

The notion of a thematic restaurant with an attraction view is clearly within the catalog of things Disney does.

To me, it's an obvious consideration with a Coco boat ride. It's a type of ride (boats), a mood (nighttime,) and a cuisine (Mexican, in Southern California) that is like the planets lining up.

In terms of not hearing about it, it's like the Stark Flight Lab. We didn't hear about it...until we heard about it. Possibly same for a second Avatar attraction. I'm not predicting it -- I think Disney is in an awful era, making it unlikely.

This is a really interesting take. Agree with the sentiment towards DCA and what it’s lacking. Personally this is the first time I’ve even thought about our Coco ride getting a Blue Bauou type of restaurant. I’m assuming you’re saying that because this ride was originally conceived for the boat ride at Mexico/ Epcot.

When I heard "Coco boat ride" I just immediately thought "well, I hope it has an always-nighttime restaurant" based on the examples above, nighttime vibe, cuisine, etc. as noted above. I wasn't aware of the Epcot history of the project.

 

[mickEblu]

No, I'm not joking.

View-of-attraction restaurants have been included many times in Disney parks: Blue Bayou (x4, with different names), San Angel Inn, Coral Reef, Garden Grill, Pinocchio Village Haus at Magic Kingdom...

They have also, in recent years, built some elaborate/immersive dining locations in the parks like Space 220 and Beak & Barrel.

The notion of a thematic restaurant with an attraction view is clearly within the catalog of things Disney does.

To me, it's an obvious consideration with a Coco boat ride. It's a type of ride (boats), a mood (nighttime,) and a cuisine (Mexican, in Southern California) that is like the planets lining up.

In terms of not hearing about it, it's like the Stark Flight Lab. We didn't hear about it...until we heard about it. Possibly same for a second Avatar attraction. I'm not predicting it -- I think Disney is in an awful era, making it unlikely.


When I heard "Coco boat ride" I just immediately thought "well, I hope it has an always-nighttime restaurant" based on the examples above, nighttime vibe, cuisine, etc. as noted above. I wasn't aware of the Epcot history of the project.

Yeah a San Angel Inn type restaurant serving Mexican food would be great for DCA. Ive been lamenting the lack of themed indoor spaces at DCA forever so this would be perfect. Ive said this before but there is the greatest chance for disappointment with the Coco ride for various reasons below:

• A Coco boat ride lends itself very well to a well rounded, themed experience so our imagination can run wild and expectations are high
• The fact that they've came out and said they re using POTC/ Mansion as inspiration
• We know the least about it

Expectations are mostly in check for Avengers when it comes to those of us around here. We know it's Pan's ride system and I don't think anyone is even expecting it to be better than IOA's Spiderman from 20+ years ago. As far as Avatar you have the Cameron factor and that it's the Mega E they re going to throw a lot of resources at.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Yeah I won’t get my hopes up … I’m not sure if the show building will be big enough for even a large enough ride, let alone a restaurant.

 

[Disney Irish]

No, I'm not joking.

View-of-attraction restaurants have been included many times in Disney parks: Blue Bayou (x4, with different names), San Angel Inn, Coral Reef, Garden Grill, Pinocchio Village Haus at Magic Kingdom...

They have also, in recent years, built some elaborate/immersive dining locations in the parks like Space 220 and Beak & Barrel.

The notion of a thematic restaurant with an attraction view is clearly within the catalog of things Disney does.

To me, it's an obvious consideration with a Coco boat ride. It's a type of ride (boats), a mood (nighttime,) and a cuisine (Mexican, in Southern California) that is like the planets lining up.

In terms of not hearing about it, it's like the Stark Flight Lab. We didn't hear about it...until we heard about it. Possibly same for a second Avatar attraction. I'm not predicting it -- I think Disney is in an awful era, making it unlikely.


When I heard "Coco boat ride" I just immediately thought "well, I hope it has an always-nighttime restaurant" based on the examples above, nighttime vibe, cuisine, etc. as noted above. I wasn't aware of the Epcot history of the project.

Stark's was announced when they finally fleshed out the concept and gave all the details including the names and announced the construction start time. They already announced that for Coco, ie it would have been part of the announcement when they said "we're starting construction fall 2025" . So I don't expect some last minute "oh by the way we decided to add a restaurant that we didn't previously mention just because we're nice" type of announcement coming at next years D23.

Plus not to mention that there likely isn't enough space for a full attraction, plus full kitchen, plus full dining area to be built in that area.

A second attraction at Avatar is still possible though, so you may get your wish there as there will be two more D23s before it opens.

 

[britain]

I’ve said this before, but I really think people are putting way too much stock in Disney’s mentioning of Pirates and Mansion. I am 99% certain this Coco attraction will feel a lot like a boat version of DCA’s Little Mermaid ride. They just don’t make them like they used to anymore. ESPECIALLY if an animated cartoon is the source material (unlike an Avatar or a Star Wars).

 

[Disney Analyst]

I’ve said this before, but I really think people are putting way too much stock in Disney’s mentioning of Pirates and Mansion. I am 99% certain this Coco attraction will feel a lot like a boat version of DCA’s Little Mermaid ride. They just don’t make them like they used to anymore. ESPECIALLY if an animated cartoon is the source material (unlike an Avatar or a Star Wars).

I think a lot of us expect Rapunzel, but hope for Frozen Tokyo instead.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think a lot of us expect Rapunzel, but hope for Frozen Tokyo instead.

And I think this is a good expectation to have, though I would hope its a little longer than 5 minutes like Rapunzel.

 

[Disney Analyst]

And I think this is a good expectation to have, though I would hope its a little longer than 5 minutes like Rapunzel.

Believe me, as someone who just experienced both. If it’s the Frozen flume style layout and length, people will be pleased.

If it’s Rapunzel… I expect much disappointment. Kinda like how Navi River Journey is gorgeous but lacking.

 

[AJFireman]

Not sure if you caught my previous post but i was incorrect.
RunDisney maps posted for the final Disneyland weekend ending February 2. Previously we entered at the light running the back road. Now looks like we enter backstage and for the half stay backstage until we get back into the park. But for the 10k looks like we go back to the road that parallels Katella. Maybe there will be some hints of what goes and what stays.

 

[Disney Irish]

Not sure if you caught my previous post but i was incorrect.
RunDisney maps posted for the final Disneyland weekend ending February 2. Previously we entered at the light running the back road. Now looks like we enter backstage and for the half stay backstage until we get back into the park. But for the 10k looks like we go back to the road that parallels Katella. Maybe there will be some hints of what goes and what stays.
View attachment 899956
View attachment 899957

The fenced off area (marked in red) is to start removal of the trees and such outside of backstage that is on Katella/Disneyland Dr.

RunDisney path will just go around that.

Real backstage work I don't expect to be started until after RunDisney, just like for the EGW/Avatar. So there is not much to be gleaned from the RunDisney path in my opinion.

 

[DrStarlander]

Stark's was announced when they finally fleshed out the concept and gave all the details including the names and announced the construction start time. They already announced that for Coco, ie it would have been part of the announcement when they said "we're starting construction fall 2025" .

I'd caution against putting too much stock in how Disney has gone about rolling out information on past projects and projecting that forward, as if there's a "playbook" they use consistently. I think it's a lot messier and less consistent than that. I agree the probability of things happening can go up and down, but I don't think their approach is dependable and bankable.

For example, as you point out, we learned the name of the Avenger's attractions in August of 2024, at least 6 months before construction started. We seem on the precipice of construction starting on Coco and we don't know the attraction's name. Pattern, if there was one, broken.

The timing of Disney proving info can be influenced by the intersection of the project's schedule and D23. At the time of D23 in 2024 they had the info and had made the decisions on Avengers (a project many years in the works and six months away from construction) and were able to provide info. But at that time they were at least 18 months away from starting Coco, so maybe they hadn't committed as far, so the information was perhaps not as fulsome. And would they have done an out-of-the-blue social media post six or whatever months later to announce further details such as a restaurant. Maybe. Who knows. That's all beside the point. At least my point.

We're in agreement it's unlikely. Or you may think impossible and I think unlikely. But whether or not it could happen is not even the conversation I'm interested in. I'm interested in making the point it "should" happen. That's the stake I'm wanting to put in the ground. Not to raise the bar higher than it should be in order to beat Disney down. But to raise the bar as high as the bar has been in past years and decades of Disney parks development. Like in 1967. Or 1982.

And I never expect Disney to do something "because they're nice." I expect them to do things that they think will make money. An always-night view-of-attraction Coco Mexican restaurant would be -- among the park's dining options -- easily arguably the most in-demand experience. Everything about it checks the money-making boxes: atmosphere, novelty, cuisine, music, air conditioning, thematically-appropriate cocktail.

Plus not to mention that there likely isn't enough space for a full attraction, plus full kitchen, plus full dining area to be built in that area.

True. Which is why the placement of this IP/attraction is likely a mistake. Coco deserves the space to exploit all its potential (attraction, dining, festive marketplace retail, live entertainment). Many other PixarIPs that don't have the "full potential" and only deserve an attraction could have been squeezed back there.

I’ve said this before, but I really think people are putting way too much stock in Disney’s mentioning of Pirates and Mansion. I am 99% certain this Coco attraction will feel a lot like a boat version of DCA’s Little Mermaid ride. They just don’t make them like they used to anymore.

Sadly I think you are probably right.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'd caution against putting too much stock in how Disney has gone about rolling out information on past projects and projecting that forward, as if there's a "playbook" they use consistently. I think it's a lot messier and less consistent than that. I agree the probability of things happening can go up and down, but I don't think their approach is dependable and bankable.

For example, as you point out, we learned the name of the Avenger's attractions in August of 2024, at least 6 months before construction started. We seem on the precipice of construction starting on Coco and we don't know the attraction's name. Pattern, if there was one, broken.

The timing of Disney proving info can be influenced by the intersection of the project's schedule and D23. At the time of D23 in 2024 they had the info and had made the decisions on Avengers (a project many years in the works and six months away from construction) and were able to provide info. But at that time they were at least 18 months away from starting Coco, so maybe they hadn't committed as far, so the information was perhaps not as fulsome. And would they have done an out-of-the-blue social media post six or whatever months later to announce further details such as a restaurant. Maybe. Who knows. That's all beside the point. At least my point.

We're in agreement it's unlikely. Or you may think impossible and I think unlikely. But whether or not it could happen is not even the conversation I'm interested in. I'm interested in making the point it "should" happen. That's the stake I'm wanting to put in the ground. Not to raise the bar higher than it should be in order to beat Disney down. But to raise the bar as high as the bar has been in past years and decades of Disney parks development. Like in 1967. Or 1982.

And I never expect Disney to do something "because they're nice." I expect them to do things that they think will make money. An always-night view-of-attraction Coco Mexican restaurant would be -- among the park's dining options -- easily arguably the most in-demand experience. Everything about it checks the money-making boxes: atmosphere, novelty, cuisine, music, air conditioning, thematically-appropriate cocktail.

Well if we discussed all the things Disney should do rather than what they actually are doing, well that would take up an entire forum unto itself in my opinion. As there are whole planet loads of things over the last 100 years of this companies existence that we all think Disney should be doing, especially since 1966 when Walt died. But alas that is not the reality we live.

So yes your point is noted that Disney should build a Coco Blue Bayou style restaurant as part of this project, but likely won't.

True. Which is why the placement of this IP/attraction is likely a mistake. Coco deserves the space to exploit all its potential (attraction, dining, festive marketplace retail, live entertainment). Many other PixarIPs that don't have the "full potential" and only deserve an attraction could have been squeezed back there.

Again that is a conversation that is already past, as that is where it is being placed. So again your point is noted, but there isn't much to be discussed about that at this point. If you'd like to draw up your own plans on where it would be better placed, well there is an Imagineering forum where all that can be discussed.

 

[mickEblu]

I’ve said this before, but I really think people are putting way too much stock in Disney’s mentioning of Pirates and Mansion. I am 99% certain this Coco attraction will feel a lot like a boat version of DCA’s Little Mermaid ride. They just don’t make them like they used to anymore. ESPECIALLY if an animated cartoon is the source material (unlike an Avatar or a Star Wars).

This person isn't but they should be a little more careful with their wording if they know they re giving people a Coco version of the Tangled boat ride at TDS. POTC and Mansion are like the holy grail of Disney attractions and you don't throw those words around if you are just talking about a couple of special effects and projection mapping skeletons.

In the version of the attraction I mentioned above I think it would be really neat if the beginning of the attraction with a boat ride through Mexico and the cemetery was more realistic like POTC and then after the drop is where the attraction would start looking more like the animated film in the Land of the Dead. Kind of like Splash Mountain. Have the drop be the transition from the real world to the "fantasy" world as well as be a really neat story telling device to signify our transition from the land of the living to the land of the dead.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Well if we discussed all the things Disney should do rather than what they actually are doing, well that would take up an entire forum unto itself in my opinion. As there are whole planet loads of things over the last 100 years of this companies existence that we all think Disney should be doing, especially since 1966 when Walt died. But alas that is not the reality we live.

So yes your point is noted that Disney should build a Coco Blue Bayou style restaurant as part of this project, but likely won't.


Again that is a conversation that is already past, as that is where it is being placed. So again your point is noted, but there isn't much to be discussed about that at this point. If you'd like to draw up your own plans on where it would be better placed, well there is an Imagineering forum where all that can be discussed.

I mean, they can certainly fit a significant attraction there, if they decide to go back to the roots of Disneyland where you build creatively to fit rides everywhere.

Dig down, and build up.

 

[DrStarlander]

Well if we discussed all the things Disney should do rather than what they actually are doing, well that would take up an entire forum unto itself in my opinion.

Can I introduce you to the concept of a theme park forum .

Again that is a conversation that is already past, as that is where it is being placed. So again your point is noted, but there isn't much to be discussed about that at this point. If you'd like to draw up your own plans on where it would be better placed, well there is an Imagineering forum where all that can be discussed.

This isn't a "construction" thread. This is a thread titled "Coco Boat Ride Coming to Disney California Adventure." Since when -- in general topic discussions -- do people stop bemoaning Disney's bad past decisions because the comment is moot? Pop culture forums are largely fueled by criticizing things that have already happened and are too late to change.

But taken together, what I'm hearing you say is "don't talk about what Disney should do in this thread" and "don't talk about what Disney has already done" in this thread. So...what do you think should be discussed, if not the future or the past. Just the paint marking on the sidewalk?

Maybe someone should start a construction thread for people who just want that?

 

[Disney Irish]

Can I introduce you to the concept of a theme park forum .

Can I introduce you to the concept of reading my entire post, ie where I said it would take up an entire forum unto itself. There are a lot of threads around here that end up getting cleaned up by the Mods because people start talking about what Disney should do rather than staying on topic of what they are actually doing, thousands upon thousands of posts.

This is isn't a "construction" thread. This is a thread titled "Coco Boat Ride Coming to Disney California Adventure." Since when -- in general topic discussions -- do people stop bemoaning Disney's bad past decisions because the comment is moot? Pop culture forums are largely fueled by criticizing things that have already happened and are too late to change.

But taken together, what I'm hearing you say is "don't talk about what Disney should do in this thread" and "don't talk about what Disney has already done" in this thread. So...what do you think should be discussed, if not the future or the past. Just the paint marking on the sidewalk?

Maybe someone should start a construction thread for people who just want that?

I don't see where the thread title says "What are your ideas of what Disney should do with Coco now that its coming to DCA". That seems to be what you only want to discuss, so maybe go start a thread for people that just want to discuss that?

Also you're not talking about the future of this project, you're talking about "well this is what I would do if I was in-charge of building this thing out" as you were trying to do in the Avenger thread with your Spider-Man coaster discussion. So that isn't trying to stay on-topic, that is trying to throw out your Imagineering ideas to start a different topic under the guise of "well its about the project IP so still on topic".

Because as much as I participate in thread drift and derailing a thread I do like to drive things back on topic as much as possible and keep the Mods jobs easier. The unwritten rule that the Mods have directed in many a thread to prevent thread drift and derailing a thread is when a project location is known to keep all "they should have done this" and "well I would do this instead" type of discussion to a minimum. But hey I'm not a mod, do what you want, I was just trying to keep things on topic and make the Mods life easier for when they invariably have to clean things up later.

 

[Disney Irish]

I mean, they can certainly fit a significant attraction there, if they decide to go back to the roots of Disneyland where you build creatively to fit rides everywhere.

Dig down, and build up.

Oh sure anything is possible, the question is is it probable, probably not. As when was the last time Disney dug down and built up for a single attraction project like this? At DLR I can't think of any in the history of the Resort, but maybe I'm not remembering everything correctly.

 

[coffeefan]

I mean, they can certainly fit a significant attraction there, if they decide to go back to the roots of Disneyland where you build creatively to fit rides everywhere.

Dig down, and build up.

According to Brickey, the entire Mexico Pavilion could fit back there if they used all the space available. We don't know the full scale of the project, but I wish they were that ambitious. It would help block the noise from Incredicoaster too.

 

[Disney Irish]

According to Brickey, the entire Mexico Pavilion could fit back there if they used all the space available. We don't know the full scale of the project, but I wish they were that ambitious. It would help block the noise from Incredicoaster too.

I mentioned the same thing awhile back as well, might have even been before or right after the Brickey video where he mentioned it. The question is how they orient things (doubt it'll be completely enclosed though) and how much of backstage are they taking. More will come into focus when demo starts.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Oh sure anything is possible, the question is is it probable, probably not. As when was the last time Disney dug down and built up for a single attraction project like this? At DLR I can't think of any in the history of the Resort, but maybe I'm not remembering everything correctly.

Pirates was dug down I believe, that’s how they could create the epic scale inside the main show without building a crazy tall box of a warehouse.