News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom

[JenniferS]

Not saying that this info is correct as i'm sort of skeptical of some myself. But I will say that i've seen large info dumps like these including a variety of different attractions. If this came from an imagineer or someone who knows one, a lot of them do talk to one another and share information on each other's projects. Even sometimes creatives working for different competing theme park companies (Disney and Universal often have some overlap in drawing from pools of talent, and quite a number of current Universal creatives are former WDI people from what I understand).

The post about Epic seems a bit sketchy to me. I've heard ample praise for that park, but i'm not sure the opening day roster will have anything with a ton of animatronics. At least not compared to the amount in POTC. I'd also guess they're still going to be screen heavy too. Phase 2 could potentially have some promise in that regard, heard some interesting Luigi-related rumors. But that's a long way out, if it ever actually happens.

I’m willing to file these under “We’ll see”.
I’ll be the first to admit that I have zero insider knowledge.

 

[wdrive]

Jim posts some great stuff on Twitter, but he’s not involved with the company anymore and as others have said his Twitter is often full of mistakes and inaccuracies.

I don’t personally put much weight into his Zootopia in MK comment

 

[Kev1982]

I really hope this isnt true. If its not villains i might go over to the dark side…

 

[SpectreJordan]

Just spoke with someone in the know...I don't often claim this, but I actually spoke to someone with firsthand knowledge (see discussion of when TRON was going to open if you don't believe my source's track record). I've posted a couple other tidbits of what they shared in other threads.

There is a proposal that is close to getting funding for "Beyond Big Thunder" and it's...not any of the three previously discussed ideas. They would not tell me over pain of death what the IP it's centered on is, but in their opinion, it doesn't fit and is one of the worst possible things they could be adding to Magic Kingdom. And it definitely is NOT Villains' Land.

Again, not approved or funded yet, but getting close.

The Zootopia land looks really cool but it really shouldn't be in MK. DHS is begging for something like that too.

It also sounds like a downgrade too. The Zootopia land doesn't seem that big & it sounded like the original plans were going to be pretty expansive. Not really sure what the Zootopia land would do to help MK's capacity vs the 2 (or 1 big) lands that were shown.

Seems like they're just going the cheap route & copying something that's already done. But man, atleast do it in the park that needs it. MK can wait until they want to start spending real money again.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

https://x.com/jimshull/status/1741177033286410376?s=46&t=HF1o3IG97G3ppq91ZzfqrA

Twitter: Jim Shull

I don’t think this is real, as he isn’t a reliable source (I don’t think). Just found this interesting, I like Zootopia but not in this plot of land. I’m hoping they do Villians.

I’m more posting this because I wasn’t even aware Zootopia was a possible idea for this plot of land?

How very disconcerting. I knew they were itching to add Zootopia but I would have hoped DHS or not at all. Magic Kingdom would be such a mistake especially where planned if still rumored to happen. I had heard that Zootopia was planned originally for the RSR tech and that it might have gone to DHS... but that was years ago. Seems the easier path is to plop down a clone. Sigh! Magic Kingdom needs little. The other parks are in dire need of more to do.

 

[Cliff]

So in Q`1 2024, we are looking at a potential Boardroom earthquake. It's impossible to know yet just how strong this shakeup will be. There is a plausible "chance" that we could see a gigantic shake-up that could radically change the course of the company's current direction and goals. (I do hope this happens)

Or,...very little happens and Disney proceeds on it's current path and stays locked on it's "usual" mission targets??

Even if Disney announces something soon, it could be completely scrapped "if" a new Boardroom want's change direction.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

So in Q`1 2024, we are looking at a potential Boardroom earthquake. It's impossible to know yet just how strong this shakeup will be. There is a plausible "chance" that we could see a gigantic shake-up that could radically change the course of the company's current direction and goals. (I do hope this happens)

Or,...very little happens and Disney proceeds on it's current path and stays locked on it's "usual" mission targets??

Even if Disney announces something soon, it could be completely scrapped "if" a new Boardroom want's change direction.

On the heels of box office duds. Though I wonder if it's not Parks related. Are they're fearing Comcast's momentum?

Imagineers often retain their connections within the company long after they left. So him no longer being employed there doesn't mean he's ignorant of what's going on there.

This Beyond Big Thunder project is clearly still in a state of such extreme flux that I doubt anyone knows what it will actually contain upon final approval. That very much includes the actual imagineers who are directly working on it. And that's assuming anything is actually built at all, because there's always a significant chance it could get canned entirely.

Zootopia seems plenty stupid enough that I have no difficulty believing someone over at WDI did in fact pitch it as an idea. So I'm inclined to believe that Jim is probably telling the truth about something he really heard from a WDI source. Especially since he made that tweet with fairly confident language. Again, I don't have any idea if that's what they'll go with. But I don't feel he's just making things up or using a dubious source.

Well we're also hearing, though unsubstantiated at moment, that Indy isn't going to DAK. Which would leave a hole for Dinosaur. Could the Coco IP fill it? If so what implications would that have on "Beyond Big Thunder" as it was to originally feature both an Encanto and Coco expansion. Then there's the talk of Zootopia being plopped down in the BBT space. If anything this just goes to show that the original announcement was a Blue Sky pitch to get a rise out of the fandom. What actually transpires is still anyone's best guess. I'm not convinced that even Imagineering knows. Still in flux. Perhaps a boardroom shakeup will help get the ball rolling.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The post about Epic seems a bit sketchy to me. I've heard ample praise for that park, but i'm not sure the opening day roster will have anything with a ton of animatronics. At least not compared to the amount in POTC. I'd also guess they're still going to be screen heavy too. Phase 2 could potentially have some promise in that regard, heard some interesting Luigi-related rumors. But that's a long way out, if it ever actually happens.

Theme Park Stop has suggested the Monsters and Ministry of Magic dark rides will be AA heavy, so it sounds like multiple people are reporting that rumor. Pirates level is unique to the post on this site, though.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

TRON, Zootopia...

If they want to make MK more like SDL they should start with updating Peter Pan and Buzz Lightyear.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Stuff like that just smacks of the poorest planning, to me. Like the Nemo Musical opening at Animal Kingdom 2 months before Nemo opened at The Living Seas in EPCOT . . . yes those attractions serve different purposes, but it suggests a lack of understanding for the parks and/or the property to put it in disparate places like that.

They need to get serious about deciding on the best experience an IP can bring the guests and delivering it in the most thematically appropriate way. Spreading things across multiple parks within the same resort is so wishy washy, like they don't actually know what to do with what they've created.

Meanwhile, the parks as designed tend to be pretty intuitive - it's usually not hard to figure out where a property *should* go. The problem is that's often at odds with what's operationally useful. Frozen didn't go into EPCOT because it suited that park best, it went there because EPCOT needed help and adding a billion dollar franchise was the easiest way to get a home run out of a bunt. But we all know that Frozen should have gone in Fantasyland, it's just that operationally Fantasyland (and MK) were not as much in need of an infusion as EPCOT. Which doesn't make the move any less of a mistake.

Beyond the attitude that the parks are interchangeable and IP can just go wherever, having the same IP in multiple parks also suggests that they do not have much interest or confidence in many of their own IPs to begin with.

The Disney Vault used to be a treasure trove of content to draw from. Now, as I've said before, they seem to be only interested in around a dozen or less titles. If it's not Toy Story, Moana or Frozen it's garbage...even if it was a consistent money maker in the past or would lend itself better to a ride.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

How very disconcerting. I knew they were itching to add Zootopia but I would have hoped DHS or not at all. Magic Kingdom would be such a mistake especially where planned if still rumored to happen. I had heard that Zootopia was planned originally for the RSR tech and that it might have gone to DHS... but that was years ago. Seems the easier path is to plop down a clone. Sigh! Magic Kingdom needs little. The other parks are in dire need of more to do.

DHS definitely feels like the best spot for a Zootopia land - another land where you can be immersed in a film land

Not saying would be my first choice but if taking any (new) land from an international park and putting it in Beyond Big Thunder spot I would think a Frozen land would look the best and have broader appeal

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

DHS definitely feels like the best spot for a Zootopia land - another land where you can be immersed in a film land

Not saying would be my first choice but if taking any (new) land from an international park and putting it in Beyond Big Thunder spot I would think a Frozen land would look the best and have broader appeal

My problem with all of it is LANDS. I'm tired of single-IP based lands. Especially if they're to be in MK.

 

[MisterPenguin]

My problem with all of it is LANDS. I'm tired of single-IP based lands. In MK especially.

MK has single-IP lands?

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

MK has single-IP lands?

Not yet.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

My problem with all of it is LANDS. I'm tired of single-IP based lands. Especially if they're to be in MK.

true, don't disagree with that - one reason I got more excited about the 2nd plans for Dinoland as it was the tropical Americas with IP in it vs "Moana land"

Guess a broader "Villians Land" would be good as could be villians from various properties

 

[TheMaxRebo]

MK has single-IP lands?

used to have Mickey Starland

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Beyond the attitude that the parks are interchangeable and IP can just go wherever, having the same IP in multiple parks also suggests that they do not have much interest or confidence in many of their own IPs to begin with.

The Disney Vault used to be a treasure trove of content to draw from. Now, as I've said before, they seem to be only interested in around a dozen or less titles. If it's not Toy Story, Moana or Frozen it's garbage...even if it was a consistent money maker in the past or would lend itself better to a ride.

YEP. Add to that how weirdly reactive rather than proactive they seem to be about getting even big ticket IPs into the parks and it definitely seems to speak to a strange lack of confidence.

Think of TRON opening in MK more than a decade after the movie's release, Ratatouille 14 years later . . . even the Disney Renaissance films taking 2 full decades to get anything resembling a major attraction (and some of those STILL don't even have one!!)

I get that this approach spares them building attractions for movies like Bolt which don't really hit, but it also seems to deny them the ability to shape the experience of the parks with their own hand. Instead they seem to be almost exclusively chasing what the audience thinks they want, which isn't actually always the best guide.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

even the Disney Renaissance films taking 2 full decades to get anything resembling a major attraction (and some of those STILL don't even have one!!)

Aladdin was released over 30 years ago and all we got was the same flat ride in 3 different parks

(though I like the show at TDS)

 

[bmr1591]

There’s simply no vision. It’s just throw lands out there dedicated to single IPs instead of strategically using your IP to enhance the great mission and theme of each park.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Aladdin was released over 30 years ago and all we got was the same flat ride in 3 different parks

Which is wild because if any of the Disney Renaissance films served up a concept begging for a dark ride it was that one.

Imagine an alternate universe where in 1995 the MK opened Adventureland's answer to Peter Pan's Flight, with updated tech and clever Genie effects. Just dream . . .