AK Dragon on Logo Explained

[stitchcastle]

This is just ridiculous, Just because the Yeti is somewhat mythological doesn't mean that it can only work in BK. the Yeti is a different kind of mythological creature in that its existence has been gathered from actual sightings along with legends. Beastly Kingdom as a whole has a more european feel to it and it wouldn't hurt EE if BK existed.

The Yeti is in Asia because it originated in Asia. Beastly Kingdom would have been dedicated to the more european and more fabled mythical creatures like dragons, unicorns, loch ness monster and such. Now i wonder where Big Foot fits in...

Mt. Prometheus and Journey to the Center of The Earth will NEVER fit in thematically into Animal Kingdom. And you can't just retheme it, how can you explain independently-mobile vehicles with wheels and a motor to run around a medieval place with Dragons all over. If you say theme to an apocalyptic area where dragons have taken over would severely limit the land's flexibility.

the creature in the logo has wings, Lucky does not.

They don't have to do anything with the FOTLK theater, remember, Tarzan Rocks is in Dinoland

More "Animal Treks" would defeat the park's "Not A Zoo" mentality. Animal Kingdom is supposed to be "a theme park with animals" not "a zoo with rides". The reason AK is doing so poorly is because there are too few rides and too many exhibits just lying around, If people wanted to go see animals on exhibit they'd go to a zoo, which is much cheaper. if AK really wants to make us of these exhibits they should somehow turn them into parts of rides or at least find a way for people to not walk around. and stand.

 

[speck76]

More "Animal Treks" would defeat the park's "Not A Zoo" mentality

But it is an animal park....correct?

 

[stitchcastle]

^^^^ look at my newly edited post above yours

 

[CaptainMichael]

This is just ridiculous, Just because the Yeti is somewhat mythological doesn't mean that it can only work in BK. the Yeti is a different kind of mythological creature in that its existence has been gathered from actual sightings along with legends. Beastly Kingdom as a whole has a more european feel to it and it wouldn't hurt EE if BK existed.

You cannot have a land based entirely on mythological, fantasy animals and have an attraction devoted to a Yeti in the middle of Asia and still make sense. Dragon Tower and European feel of Beastly Kingdom would fit well in a land based on Europe. I say Animal Kingdom should continue with the continent theme. It works.

Mt. Prometheus and Journey to the Center of The Earth will NEVER fit in thematically into Animal Kingdom. And you can't just retheme it, how can you explain independently-mobile vehicles with wheels and a motor to run around a medieval place with Dragons all over. If you say theme to an apocalyptic area where dragons have taken over would severely limit the land's flexibility.

Not necessarily true. JttCotE could fit thematically into Animal Kingdom. It would just have to be placed in a continent that contains volcanos.

 

[pat_naughty05]

I don't know how many of you have read "Since the World Began" (it was at WDW during the 25 year celebration), but in there in talks about the then-future plans for Animal Kingdom. The book says that after the parks initial opening, there will be a new section added to the park devoted to mythological animals, such as dragons and unicorns. There's even some pretty awesome concept art. This must be what Iger is supposedly going to announce. That's great. I wondered if they would ever get around to doing this.

 

[stitchcastle]

You cannot have a land based entirely on mythological, fantasy animals and have an attraction devoted to a Yeti in the middle of Asia and still make sense. Dragon Tower and European feel of Beastly Kingdom would fit well in a land based on Europe. I say Animal Kingdom should continue with the continent theme. It works.

The Yet is a DIFFERENT kind of Mythological Creature which has a more oriental origin, placing it in a land where most other creatures are of European descent would be stupid. and yes you can have both and STILL make sense. The continent theme is merely a coincidence since Africa and Asia are both continents full of exotic fauna (and in this case, so do Australia and The Amazon). Try pushing the continent theme against Dinoland.

Not necessarily true. JttCotE could fit thematically into Animal Kingdom. It would just have to be placed in a continent that contains volcanos.

NO...Gosh I hope i didn't have to explain this again but you asked for it...

JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH is based on the works of Jules Verne, every animal that shows up in the ride has no right to be in Animal Kingdom becasue they are works of fiction and are in no way related to the real world. Now you can say that BEASTLIE KINGDOMME is full of fictional animals...WRONG sure they are fictional but these are animals that have been gathered from thousands of years of legends and stories from cultures from all over the world and in a sense, some of these creatures actually might exist you can't say that to creatures that sprouted out of the pages of a fictional novel. Heck, most of the animals from BK have even shaped the cultures and traditions of many countries.

So tell me, how can animals of fiction exist in a world of really for real and could be real animals?

 

[CaptainMichael]

The Yet is a DIFFERENT kind of Mythological Creature which has a more oriental origin, placing it in a land where most other creatures are of European descent would be stupid. and yes you can have both and STILL make sense. The continent theme is merely a coincidence since Africa and Asia are both continents full of exotic fauna (and in this case, so do Australia and The Amazon). Try pushing the continent theme against Dinoland.JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH is based on the works of Jules Verne, every animal that shows up in the ride has no right to be in Animal Kingdom becasue they are works of fiction and are in no way related to the real world. Now you can say that BEASTLIE KINGDOMME is full of fictional animals...WRONG sure they are fictional but these are animals that have been gathered from thousands of years of legends and stories from cultures from all over the world and in a sense, some of these creatures actually might exist you can't say that to creatures that sprouted out of the pages of a fictional novel. Heck, most of the animals from BK have even shaped the cultures and traditions of many countries. So tell me, how can animals of fiction exist in a world of really for real and could be real animals

Dinoland can easily be explained by the simple fact that Dinosaur fossils can be found all around the world, a world that used to be one giant super continent called Pangea. Australia and The Amazon are as different as they are alike. The continent thing is just a logical opinion of mine. However, the rumors of Australia being added further support my opinion.

A Mythological Creature doesn't exist. It doesn't matter if they're based on legends or created by an author. They're fake and made up from imagination. They can coexist in lands with real animals because they were imagined to be in those surroundings.

 

[stitchcastle]

Dinoland can easily be explained by the simple fact that Dinosaur fossils can be found all around the world, a world that used to be one giant super continent called Pangea. Australia and The Amazon are as different as they are alike. The continent thing is just a logical opinion of mine. However, the rumors of Australia being added further support my opinion.

I'd rather have AK theme their lands with "Places" rather than entire continents unless they are Asia or Africa. by places I mean "The Amazon"

I respect your opinion though

A Mythological Creature doesn't exist. It doesn't matter if they're based on legends or created by an author. They're fake and made up from imagination. They can coexist in lands with real animals because they were imagined to be in those surroundings.

you just don't get it do you? Mythological Creatures or scientifically known as Cryptids have shaped cultures and customs all over the world there are even possibilities for most of these creatures to actually exist. The animals in JTTCOTE are of PURE fiction and are of no cultural or historical significance other than being part of a great literary work.

 

[Iakona]

Corrus,
I'd give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't mean this in the tone you perceived.
My friends, my wife my co-workers all call me Jay; MY mother infallibly calls me Jason, and when she is mad at me adds in a few other words too. I think arcsbite meant in this way, not the very nasty way.

CAREFUL!!!!

His mother hasn't got ANYTHING to do with that...
What you did was RUDE, tasteless, and offending... keep it friendly...

 

[CaptainMichael]

I'd rather have AK theme their lands with "Places" rather than entire continents unless they are Asia or Africa. by places I mean "The Amazon"

I agree with that. That is kind of what I meant. Choose an area of a continent that sets it apart from anywhere else in the world. ie: the Australian Outback or the Amazon of South America. It'd be kind of hard to replicate an entire continent.

I understand the difference between mythological creatures and creatures made up in books. They do share something in common though, they only exist in the imagination. If an attraction such as JttCotE could not fit in its current state, it could be modified. The Animal Kingdom, Walt Disney World, and Florida could use a volcano, something besides a normal mountain. A JttCotE-esq attraction could work, if themed properly.

 

[stitchcastle]

I agree with that. That is kind of what I meant. Choose an area of a continent that sets it apart from anywhere else in the world. ie: the Australian Outback or the Amazon of South America. It'd be kind of hard to replicate an entire continent.

I understand the difference between mythological creatures and creatures made up in books. They do share something in common though, they only exist in the imagination. If an attraction such as JttCotE could not fit in its current state, it could be modified. The Animal Kingdom, Walt Disney World, and Florida could use a volcano, something besides a normal mountain. A JttCotE-esq attraction could work, if themed properly.

No... Journey to the Center of the Earth, no matter how you put it, will STILL be themed to the works of Jules Verne and will still NOT fit in thematically into Animal Kingdom. The ebst palce to put it anywhere in WDW would be The Magic Kingdom or EPCOT (provided they make a pavillion dedicated to the great literary works of science fiction like Discoveryland in Paris).

And if you are going to theme it differently like say Dragons or soemthing similar then it woul be a whole OTHER ride.

 

[speck76]

^^^^ look at my newly edited post above yours

The animal treks are like C-tickets at other parks.

With DAK adding E-tickets, they need "filler" attractions to soak up the extra guests.

IOA is a good example of a park that opened with too many E-tickets, without having nearly enough "filler"

 

[stitchcastle]

The animal treks are like C-tickets at other parks.

With DAK adding E-tickets, they need "filler" attractions to soak up the extra guests.

IOA is a good example of a park that opened with too many E-tickets, without having nearly enough "filler"

Yes I understand that the existing walkthroughs serve these purposes, but that's enough, we don't need any more walkthrough exhibits

 

[speck76]

Yes I understand that the existing walkthroughs serve these purposes, but that's enough, we don't need any more walkthrough exhibits

For the relative small cost, would it not be worth it to have these areas, instead of a park (like MK) that gets so congested that it is hard to walk around in?

 

[ctwhalerman]

The animal treks are like C-tickets at other parks.

With DAK adding E-tickets, they need "filler" attractions to soak up the extra guests.

IOA is a good example of a park that opened with too many E-tickets, without having nearly enough "filler"

Dont forget that they did try adding some filler attractions: that piece of trash called Chester and Hester's. At least the animal treks are nicely done, especially the Maharajah Jungle Trek, though yes I agree more non-E-Ticket rides are needed.

As for the volcano, does it really belong in Animal Kingdom? I don't recall any famous mythological figures that live in volcanos, and of course no animal lives in a volcano. I say save it for Adventureland.

And I wouldn't call the Yeti a mythological figure on par with literary and traditional ones such as dragons and unicorns. I think it could be fairly called a legend on par with Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, and thus would belong in an Asian mountain where it supposedly lives rather than in Beastly Kingdom.

 

[SpenceMan01]

I believe there is still a substantial amount of cleared land behind Camp Minnie-Mickey that could easily house an e-ticket ride. FotLK would not have to be relocated, though I admit there would be some transitional problems with the "woodsy" area going into something mythical (not that FotLK fits in Camp Minnie-Mickey in the first place).

http://terraserver.microsoft.com/download.ashx?t=1&s=11&x=1102:1106&y=7843:7840&z=17

There IS room back there, hell there's even a bridge in place, but it would mean re-locating a lot of things that are back there, including what looks like a pretty large canal (not sure what it's used for). I suppose if they can do it for EE, they can do it for BK.

 

[Lynx04]

http://terraserver.microsoft.com/download.ashx?t=1&s=11&x=1102:1106&y=7843:7840&z=17

There IS room back there, hell there's even a bridge in place, but it would mean re-locating a lot of things that are back there, including what looks like a pretty large canal (not sure what it's used for). I suppose if they can do it for EE, they can do it for BK.

Just by looking at that photo you can tell that AK has plenty of room to expand. Be it in the entire are just left to the entrence or the large portion of land behind Asia by Kali. I am sure that sometime in the near future something will be decided on one of those two portions of land.

 

[askmike1]

Just by looking at that photo you can tell that AK has plenty of room to expand. Be it in the entire are just left to the entrence or the large portion of land behind Asia by Kali. I am sure that sometime in the near future something will be decided on one of those two portions of land.

These images were taken in 1999, so the area in Asia is now taken up by Expedition Everest.

-Michael

 

[wbboy29]

These images were taken in 1999, so the area in Asia is now taken up by Expedition Everest.

-Michael

No its not. Everest is being built on a spot of land just to the northeast, on the over head map, of the "Theatre in the Wild." That huge chunk of land behind Asia is still open and free. The only things there right now are the construction crew trailers for the Everest design team.

 

[Dj Corona]

Okay, after 7 pages of this......
A) Other then maybe twice, the rumored Australia, (which I thought was a stronger rumor/possibility lately then Beastly Kingdom) has hardly been brought up. With EE already on it's way, how much is it a possibility, that other then EE, anything this soon is going to be announced for AK already?
B) Many, many people on this board are going to be HUGELY dissapointed, if the big 05/05/05 announcement doesn't turn out to be so big, after all.
C) Lastly, why are people spelling it Kingdomme, instead of Kingdom?