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

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
but but but....they are going to refurbish the Voyage Of The Little Mermaid Show! That will certainly drive attendance!
and don't forget about adding Zootopia to the Tree Of Life in a few years....
and the Country Bear Jamboree Disney Singalong Songbook Show.... I am so excited for the future of the parks now......lol
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Even if they didn’t know the specific attractions or themes, the could be prepping the land (and guest access to it) right now. That process alone is probably going to be at least 6-12 months of work before they even lay the foundation for any ride.
You could do some early stuff but not necessarily a whole lot. The organization of space should be rooted in the theme which means you shouldn’t just be placing the same types of facilities in the same place regardless of theme.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
Agreed. Anyone who likes villains land isn’t thinking about it deeply enough. It would NOT be a satisfying immersive experience to see Captain Hook pal around with Ursula, and Cruella DeVille. That would EMPHASIZE the fact that they are not actually villains but they are copyrighted characters that just happened to be owned by the same company.

Their stories have nothing to do with each other, their “homes” should be nowhere near each other.

They are sociopaths that don’t get along, much less form an alliance with one another, and live in the same neighborhood with one another.

They are an important ingredient in a satisfying story. That’s why they are important parts of the “heroes” attractions. But you wouldn’t make a stew out of nothing but salt, and you shouldn’t make attractions out of nothing but villains.
The wholly immersive land conceit should be the exception, not the rule. Following the success of Harry Potter, there have been many attempts to recreate that magic at varying levels of success.

I understand, and perhaps even echoed similar sentiments like, "Pixar isn't a theme". But the reality is, if you can create a designated area for a certain category of themed attractions, that also works. Simply put, it could be the dark side of Fantasyland.
 
Last edited:

celluloid

Well-Known Member
The wholly immersive land conceit should be the exception, not the rule. Following the success of Harry Potter, there have been many attempts to recreate that magic and varying levels of success.

I understand, and perhaps even echoed similar sentiments like, "Pixar isn't a theme". But the reality is, if you can create a designated area for a certain category of themed attractions, that also works. Simply put, it could be the dark side of Fantasyland.
Good point on the conceit. It can be done well with various IPs just as well as immersive worlds of one.

For Villains, an avenue off in Fantasyland as an expansion there would have made more sense, and I think a better expansion than what we got. I think that a large part of it is, a villain is only as interesting as its hero, and a hero is only as interesting as its villain.

Dark rides without the villain of the story are often not really interesting. Typically there needs to be an antagonist if you are mimicking the environments of the film. This is often even said to be one of the specific weakpoints of The Little Mermaid.

Islands of Adventure Lands that are not Harry Potter are great examples of IPs that had some connections in art direction that worked well for an entire land, plus Jurassic Park and the original custom Lost Continent with sublands for the cultural differences of its legends. I think Islands of Adventure truly did this pretty well. Potter obviously was the hyper specific world location.
A Disney comparison of those lands done well would be Frontierland, Tomorrowland and Toon Town of the 90s. Roger Rabbit was not enough on its own, but there is easily a world from Roger Rabbit where the others could fit in the art direction. Splash integrated into Frontierland very well and Tomorrowland as Buck Rogers future community of good and bad inventions made sense.

Speaking of Tomorrowland, a good example of how well rounded light and dark are within the same land but making sense is Timekeeper and Alien Encounter. Right Across from each other leading to Space Mountain and Astro Orbiter being a beacon of space fantasy thrill. Complimented by the kinetic energy of The Peoplemover as the transit system of this world and to the right, Timekeeper at the Science Center, showcasing technology in a lighthearted inspirational light. Across to the left Alien Encounter, the cautionary tale and dark side of technology when in excess.
It was my favorite land in MK for a long time because of that. Frontierland and Tomorrowland were my favs.
 
Last edited:

Fox&Hound

Well-Known Member
I love the idea of a villains land but have wondered if the studios was a better place for it. DHS already has a lot of e-tickets that skew older and they have already done villains events there before. Just imagine if they took the massive land where Indy sits, maybe even expanded into the parking lot, and gave us the expansion that park deserves.
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
I love the idea of a villains land but have wondered if the studios was a better place for it. DHS already has a lot of e-tickets that skew older and they have already done villains events there before. Just imagine if they took the massive land where Indy sits, maybe even expanded into the parking lot, and gave us the expansion that park deserves.

For all I've said about wanting Villains Land at MK, I do really think that Disney needs to focus on the 3 Non-MK parks first. It seems clear that isn't quite what they have up their sleeves, but Magic Kingdom is largely a victim of its own success. If any of the other 3 parks (ideally ALL of them) were properly engineered to pull their own weight then MK wouldn't have to scrape for every ounce of capacity it can manage.

Of course it's reasonable to want MK to get some nice new toys from time to time as well, but I think the push to expand out behind the Rivers of America comes largely from Disney wanting to bet on its fastest horse in the face of Epic Universe. They see MK as the park that pulls the guests in and EPCOT, DHS, and DAK as the places guests go when they're not at MK. A big new expansion to their headlining park serves the double purpose of pulling the largest potential group of people to the resort as well as theoretically helping solve the capacity issues they already have at that park. But I think if you keep doing that Magic Kingdom just continues to stand head and shoulders above the other parks in terms of offerings, and the prophecy fulfills itself.

This to say, I think thematically I'd prefer a Villains Land at MK, but I wouldn't say no to one at the Studios. I definitely think DHS needs much more than it's gotten, and real, genuine, jaw-dropping expansion should be a high priority for that park.
 

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
I fear that if we got, for example, a Jafar-themed ride as part of this villains land, if they ever actually did an Aladdin dark ride after that (I doubt they ever will, but still), they'd leave Jafar out of it because of redundancy or something.
 

JD80

Well-Known Member
For all I've said about wanting Villains Land at MK, I do really think that Disney needs to focus on the 3 Non-MK parks first. It seems clear that isn't quite what they have up their sleeves, but Magic Kingdom is largely a victim of its own success. If any of the other 3 parks (ideally ALL of them) were properly engineered to pull their own weight then MK wouldn't have to scrape for every ounce of capacity it can manage.

Of course it's reasonable to want MK to get some nice new toys from time to time as well, but I think the push to expand out behind the Rivers of America comes largely from Disney wanting to bet on its fastest horse in the face of Epic Universe. They see MK as the park that pulls the guests in and EPCOT, DHS, and DAK as the places guests go when they're not at MK. A big new expansion to their headlining park serves the double purpose of pulling the largest potential group of people to the resort as well as theoretically helping solve the capacity issues they already have at that park. But I think if you keep doing that Magic Kingdom just continues to stand head and shoulders above the other parks in terms of offerings, and the prophecy fulfills itself.

This to say, I think thematically I'd prefer a Villains Land at MK, but I wouldn't say no to one at the Studios. I definitely think DHS needs much more than it's gotten, and real, genuine, jaw-dropping expansion should be a high priority for that park.
Trying not to type out a 2000 word armchair imagineer post, so I'll use bullet points in an attempt not to write a wall of text.
  • People are drawn to MK because it's the castle park with an extremely popular fireworks show.
    • You get both people there to tour the park and people hopping there just for fireworks.
  • None of the parks are advertised like Magic Kingdom. That castle is on everything. In order to draw a significant amount of people away from that, you'll need 2-3 more Galaxy Edges (not strictly Star Wars but lands with that level of immersion). MK doesn't have immersive lands with a single theme. DHS needs to be that park.
  • EPCOT has it's own draw because of Festivals and Music, but I don't think it'll draw any more people away from MK. It'll be curious to see once communicore is complete and the entertainment factor is done, if it sees an increase in attendance. Not sure how to expand EPCOT further at this point.
  • Animal Kingdom just needs more and a night time draw. This has been discuss ad nauseum.
My point is that MK just needs more because it's nearly impossible to draw people away because it's THE castle park. You will either need to build another castle park or add a castle somewhere else to give a place where you get the same feels.

The only way I can see that happening is if DHS goes all out and adds 2-3 heavily themed lands and it feels like you're moving from universe to universe. The park is a mess from a design point of view so it'll never happen.
 

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
I want them to take their time with this decision. The worst thing they could do is just slap the first idea they have in there. Whatever they come up with, they need to plan it out, then let it simmer on the back burner for a while to see if the brain trust still likes it a few months later. This is a very big, very expensive project they're undertaking - and with everything their crosstown rival has going, it needs to be a hit.
No one would accuse them of rushing this….
 

Kev1982

Well-Known Member
I fear that if we got, for example, a Jafar-themed ride as part of this villains land, if they ever actually did an Aladdin dark ride after that (I doubt they ever will, but still), they'd leave Jafar out of it because of redundancy or something.
Like TBA? Where is the Dr. Facilier ride 🤷🏼
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
I love the idea of a villains land but have wondered if the studios was a better place for it. DHS already has a lot of e-tickets that skew older and they have already done villains events there before. Just imagine if they took the massive land where Indy sits, maybe even expanded into the parking lot, and gave us the expansion that park deserves.
Or, hear me out, they keep a perfectly great attraction and build a new one?
 

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
I love the whole idea of a "Dark Side of the Magic Kingdom"... If kids are afraid, they don't have to even walk through that section...Being on the backside of the park it is sequestered. The idea of a nightly fireworks battle between Villains and Heroes is delicious...Fantasmic as a fireworks show... Viewing area within the Villains land could have a completely different narration... What fun that would be...
 

Dutch Inn '76

Well-Known Member
No one would accuse them of rushing this….
Yeah, and that's why I think people's desire to have them move faster is ill-founded. There's plenty of "new" at WDW. There's no need to rush more in *right now.* I want them to take their time and do it right... as I haven't heard a good idea for the expansion yet.
 

Dutch Inn '76

Well-Known Member
For all I've said about wanting Villains Land at MK, I do really think that Disney needs to focus on the 3 Non-MK parks first. It seems clear that isn't quite what they have up their sleeves, but Magic Kingdom is largely a victim of its own success. If any of the other 3 parks (ideally ALL of them) were properly engineered to pull their own weight then MK wouldn't have to scrape for every ounce of capacity it can manage.

Of course it's reasonable to want MK to get some nice new toys from time to time as well, but I think the push to expand out behind the Rivers of America comes largely from Disney wanting to bet on its fastest horse in the face of Epic Universe. They see MK as the park that pulls the guests in and EPCOT, DHS, and DAK as the places guests go when they're not at MK. A big new expansion to their headlining park serves the double purpose of pulling the largest potential group of people to the resort as well as theoretically helping solve the capacity issues they already have at that park. But I think if you keep doing that Magic Kingdom just continues to stand head and shoulders above the other parks in terms of offerings, and the prophecy fulfills itself.

This to say, I think thematically I'd prefer a Villains Land at MK, but I wouldn't say no to one at the Studios. I definitely think DHS needs much more than it's gotten, and real, genuine, jaw-dropping expansion should be a high priority for that park.
AGREE. Other than maintenance, they should forget about the MK for ten years or so. EPCOT & AK needs their attention desperately, then the Studios. Heck, I'd rather they do some work on the water parks before they spend another dime on the MK.
 

MagicHappens1971

Well-Known Member
AGREE. Other than maintenance, they should forget about the MK for ten years or so. EPCOT & AK needs their attention desperately, then the Studios. Heck, I'd rather they do some work on the water parks before they spend another dime on the MK.
This is unfortunately is not the correct mindset. Magic Kingdom will ALWAYS be the most visited park. Nothing they ever add to another park will pull attendance from MK. They need to reopen existing capacity (like SGE) and expand the park, it needs the capacity. It’s that simple. We’re also talking about a multibillion dollar conglomerate, expanding in MK doesn’t mean they can’t expand in Epcot, or DAK.
 

Dutch Inn '76

Well-Known Member
...and someone said above that villains work because they counter the "good guy." So, Villains Land would need the "bad guy" to be sort of the protagonist; to look at the story from the other side. ...and I've had plenty enough of that already in everyday life.

There's still a place for Good vs. Bad mythology and storytelling; Heros and Heroines that we can be proud of - and I think we should leave it at that. That, in a nutshell is why I hope they don't build a "Villains Land."

Now go ahead and roll your eyes at me.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom