AK Dragon on Logo Explained

Lynx04

New Member
Dj Corona said:
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.

I am not holding my breath for any big announcement on 5/5/05. Having said that, I don't think that it is entirely out of the question either. Being that there is going to be a large gathering of press, that time would be the best time to make the announcement. If no big announcements are made on that date, don't look for any large announcements until at least EE opens.

But of course I am only stating the obvious.
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
So far as expansion goes, remember Animal Kingdom has a long, narrow shape for a reason - they can`t go further east than they have, and westwards only to the extent Camp MM goes; Reedy Creek and Boggy Creek swamps dictate this.
 

djronnieb

New Member
Original Poster
Dj Corona said:
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?

To answer your "A" question: EE has already been announced and just because they are almost done with 1 e-ticket ride doesnt mean they cant start on another one or a new land.

"B" question answer: If you look I didn't say they would announce this on 5-5, I said there is a chance they might, but my guess would be they'll do it later on when EE opens or just after it opens.

And your "C" answered: Kingdomme is the correct spelling that Disney would use, because back in the medival times, that's how Kingdomme was spelled. If you do a search, or if someone would like to explain this in more detail please go ahead, but that's the short version.
 

djronnieb

New Member
Original Poster
marni1971 said:
So far as expansion goes, remember Animal Kingdom has a long, narrow shape for a reason - they can`t go further east than they have, and westwards only to the extent Camp MM goes; Reedy Creek and Boggy Creek swamps dictate this.

could you explain why this is? I know i've heard it in the past, but I can't remember the reason.
 

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
djronnieb said:
"B" question answer: If you look I didn't say they would announce this on 5-5, I said there is a chance they might, but my guess would be they'll do it later on when EE opens or just after it opens.

I think it would make more sense to announce it now and begin construction. That way it will be semi ready roughly 2 years after the opening of Everest.
 

stitchcastle

Well-Known Member
Dj Corona said:
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?

I don't get this australia rumour. I'm beggining to think that this was merely something started by a fan.

Why would they imagineer an entirely new land when there is already one completely conceptualized waiting to be built?

I used to be on the Australia bandwagon but after careful consideration i don't really see that much potential on the theme. I'd rather see The Amazon.
 

Dj Corona

Active Member
First off, djronnieb, I didn't imply you mentioned anything about 05/05....I was making a general statement that if the big announcement(s) turn out to be nothing, ....well you get the drift. And hey, if they announce a new land on top of AK getting EE, all the better for AK. As far as it being Australia, other then showcasing the animals and culture, a "Rescuers Down Under" tie-in, etc., and as neat as it would be to see it represented wether at AK or World Showcase, it seems BK's the one everybody wants, and if they've gone that far with planning it out, it would seem pretty stupid not to go ahead with it.

Kingdomme......Kingdom, Tomatoe....Tomato, Riverside.....Dixie Landings:D
 

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
Dj Corona said:
it seems BK's the one everybody wants

Not everyone! :wave: I believe that it is too late for Beastly Kingdom. Expedition: Everest is already in Asia, and I don't believe that it can be moved. I believe that BK was a great concept, but it is time to move on.
 
STR8FAN2005 said:
I think it would make more sense to announce it now and begin construction. That way it will be semi ready roughly 2 years after the opening of Everest.


News Media Day

Friday, May 6
11:00-11:30am ET: Expedition Everest Sneak "Peak"

Future projects announcement
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Lynx04 said:
I am not holding my breath for any big announcement on 5/5/05. Having said that, I don't think that it is entirely out of the question either....

But of course I am only stating the obvious.

LOL, not obvious to all it seems.

But I totally agree - I won't be any more surprised if they announced nothing than if they tell us work will begin the week after on a new Indy ride at MGM.

No one knows either way - or if they do, they aren't telling (and smart of them not too, LOL).

AEfx, who is content being a Disney park fan and proudly proclaiming that I am NOT an "insider"
 

stitchcastle

Well-Known Member
STR8FAN2005 said:
Not everyone! :wave: I believe that it is too late for Beastly Kingdom. Expedition: Everest is already in Asia, and I don't believe that it can be moved. I believe that BK was a great concept, but it is time to move on.


how the hell would Everest being in Asia take away from the creation of Beastlie Kingdomme? You just don't get it do you? Everest will NEVER blend in Beastlie Kingdomme! not when Asia is sitting there all cozy and asian. Beastlie Kingdomme is a more european type of area!...you're never gonna learn are you?
 

AndyMagic

Well-Known Member
stitchcastle said:
how the hell would Everest being in Asia take away from the creation of Beastlie Kingdomme? You just don't get it do you? Everest will NEVER blend in Beastlie Kingdomme! not when Asia is sitting there all cozy and asian. Beastlie Kingdomme is a more european type of area!...you're never gonna learn are you?

You are HIGHLY obnoxious and I happen to completely agree that EE's existance negates the need for an entire land devoted to mythical creatures.
 

stitchcastle

Well-Known Member
AndyMagic said:
You are HIGHLY obnoxious and I happen to completely agree that EE's existance negates the need for an entire land devoted to mythical creatures.


Fine! I'm 'highly' obnoxious! Would you please read some of my previous posts in this thread to understand why statements like yours obnoxifies me a lot?

it's like saying that you can't have elephants and crocodiles in Asia because they are already in Africa. Or not building Futureworld because there is already a Tomorrowland.

The Yeti is a different kind of cryptid who won't fit in Beastlie Kingdomme simply because Beastlie Kingdomme is of european descent as opposed to the Yeti's ASIAN origin.
 

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
AndyMagic said:
You are HIGHLY obnoxious and I happen to completely agree that EE's existance negates the need for an entire land devoted to mythical creatures.

Thank you so much!!!! I'm glad someone else caught this, and I'm glad you agree with me! :sohappy:
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
djronnieb said:
could you explain why this is? I know i've heard it in the past, but I can't remember the reason.

Not only is it technically difficult (but not impossible) but these areas are prone to flooding (and it would upset WDW`s delicate balance of flood control) and if I recall one or both areas are protected too.
 

ctwhalerman

New Member
AndyMagic said:
You are HIGHLY obnoxious and I happen to completely agree that EE's existance negates the need for an entire land devoted to mythical creatures.

Come on lets keep it clean...

And he's actually right. First, Everest is a roller coaster through a mountain, and second, you encounter the Yeti, a legendary thing that supposedly lives in the ASIAN Himalayas.

Beastly Kingdom would have taken on a more mythological than legendary tone, with the dragon of the Medieval period (presumably). The main attraction would be a ride through a run-down European castle where a dragon supposedly lives. That is much different than riding through a mountain on a runaway train. And besides, AK surely needs an awesome area like BK, no matter what the main ride is like.

If you use the logic that says Everest has negated the need for Beastly Kingdom, then shouldn't Big Thunder Mountain have negated the similar runaway train-ride through Everest (or in Disneyland, the Matterhorn negate Big Thunder Mountain)?
 

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
ctwhalerman said:
If you use the logic that says Everest has negated the need for Beastly Kingdom, then shouldn't Big Thunder Mountain have negated the similar runaway train-ride through Everest (or in Disneyland, the Matterhorn negate Big Thunder Mountain)?

No! Comparing BTMR to Everest is like comparing apples and oranges likewise for Matterhorn and BTMR!!! Beastly Kingdom was supposed to be a land for mythical/legendary/fictional creatures. Everest contains a Yeti, a creature that fits the description of mythical/legendary/fictional. Therefore, it would be hard to justify an entire land on such creatures.

I believe that it is better to spread them around anyway. It would give more balance to Disney's Animal Kingdom. It is easier to create attractions based around these myths/legends.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
STR8FAN2005 said:
No! Comparing BTMR to Everest is like comparing apples and oranges likewise for Matterhorn and BTMR!!! Beastly Kingdom was supposed to be a land for mythical/legendary/fictional creatures. Everest contains a Yeti, a creature that fits the description of mythical/legendary/fictional. Therefore, it would be hard to justify an entire land on such creatures.

I believe that it is better to spread them around anyway. It would give more balance to Disney's Animal Kingdom. It is easier to create attractions based around these myths/legends.

or even better....integrate each area's mythical beasts into that area.

Asia = Yeti

Africa = too many to name
 

aimster

Active Member
If it indeed turns out to eventually be tru I will finally have a reasont o visit AK. I've been avoiding it for years because nothing there interests me.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom