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

[osian]

I see the argument but on the other hand, folks interpretation of park themes is way too literal and rigid. Disney does go to some length to have things fit rather than indiscriminately plopping them down as is often characterized.

From Wikipedia (yes, I know it's not a reliable source, but it's as good a place as any to get a definition, and it seems to be correct): "A theme park is a type of amusement park that bases its structures and attractions around a central theme, often featuring multiple areas with different themes.

The type of theme park that Magic Kingdom is, and most theme parks actually, conform to the "multiple areas" aspect. No actual central theme, apart from in this case it's "magical". Disneyland is, erm, a land of Disney. Six Flags parks similar. And Universal. Some may go deeper with a central theme, e.g. Silver Dollar City which has the overarching old world, rustic feel. WDW's subsequent three parks were built around a specific, central theme. Deliberately.

Thing is, when a theme park does have a specific, central theme, and it was built for that purpose, it is actually expected that it sticks to that theme. That's not a bad thing. You're saying that once built, the theme shouldn't be adhered to.

Why shouldn't a parlk that is built to celebrate human achievements continie to have attractions built to clerebrate human achievements, for example? Why is it too rigid to stick to that theme? If it's not stuck to, the theme becomes irrlevant and it just becomes another "multiple areas" park with no central theme.

Universal's parks are like that and Disney is aspiring to convert its parks into that image, rather than continuing to keep the specific themes that certain parks were built for.

Disney isnt' really "going to some lengths" to fit things in appropriately (unless you mean the head-scratching that goes on after they've chosen what to do). The theme should be first and foremost in a park with a specific theme, and design attractions around that. Then there's no need to make things "fit". Once they've decided tgo tell a story about that theme, them (if they want to they should look at what movie IP could best tell that story. Not decide on the IP first and then try to make it fit.

 

[celluloid]

From Wikipedia (yes, I know it's not a reliable source, but it's as good a place as any to get a definition, and it seems to be correct): "A theme park is a type of amusement park that bases its structures and attractions around a central theme, often featuring multiple areas with different themes.

The type of theme park that Magic Kingdom is, and most theme parks actually, conform to the "multiple areas" aspect. No actual central theme, apart from in this case it's "magical". Disneyland is, erm, a land of Disney. Six Flags parks similar. And Universal. Some may go deeper with a central theme, e.g. Silver Dollar City which has the overarching old world, rustic feel.

Each Park's dedication plaque is a good one to go by for each park having a unique central theme.

If the buzz word is the only thing that matters. Disney is themed to Disney. Then it never matters which land, or which of the four parks in WDW something goes into.

Americana past, present and future was always Disneyland. Walt's Speech even mentions that.
Everything is romanticized, even European roots and exotic cultures. Disneyland was American Optimism. Apparently, some people now find that offensive, even though it never said it was reality. Just romanticized with some hard truths sprinkled in. Optimism of past, present and tomorrow.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

From Wikipedia (yes, I know it's not a reliable source, but it's as good a place as any to get a definition, and it seems to be correct): "A theme park is a type of amusement park that bases its structures and attractions around a central theme, often featuring multiple areas with different themes.

The type of theme park that Magic Kingdom is, and most theme parks actually, conform to the "multiple areas" aspect. No actual central theme, apart from in this case it's "magical". Disneyland is, erm, a land of Disney. Six Flags parks similar. And Universal. Some may go deeper with a central theme, e.g. Silver Dollar City which has the overarching old world, rustic feel. WDW's subsequent three parks were built around a specific, central theme. Deliberately.

Magic Kingdom's central theme is to "bring Joy and Inspiration and New Knowledge to all who come to this happy place … a Magic Kingdom where the young at heart of all ages can laugh and play and learn – together."

Each park's dedication plaque explains the central theme, for example DAK's is "Welcome to a kingdom of animals… real, ancient, and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs, and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony, and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn."

 

[Jrb1979]

Magic Kingdom's central theme is to "bring Joy and Inspiration and New Knowledge to all who come to this happy place … a Magic Kingdom where the young at heart of all ages can laugh and play and learn – together."

Each park's dedication plaque explains the central theme, for example DAK's is "Welcome to a kingdom of animals… real, ancient, and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs, and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony, and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn."

Unfortunately they are moving away from those themes. They should put the MK dedication and transfer it to the rest of the parks. That's where they are headed to.

 

[celluloid]

Unfortunately they are moving away from those themes. They should put the MK dedication and transfer it to the rest of the parks. That's where they are headed to.

That is exactly the problem. It has become so vague that any attraction can just go anywhere.

Galaxy's Edge in Disneyland is a prime example of a good land with a strong major attraction, but under any reasonable declaration has no business being in Disneyland when matched up with Walt's Dedication and themes since day one.

 

[aladdin2007]

That is exactly the problem. It has become so vague that any attraction can just go anywhere.

Galaxy's Edge in Disneyland is a prime example of a good land with a strong major attraction, but under any reasonable declaration has no business being in Disneyland when matched up with Walt's Dedication and themes since day one.

True, that's how they want it now, so they don't have to update and change things out per say with the times and the free will to put something wherever they want no matter what,,,sadly....but I do feel the AK project seems to be getting lots of care in its research and design,,,,as for BBT, sounds to me like more plopping of IP,,,but will see.

 

[James Alucobond]

Other than real estate, why would that be out of place in Fantasyland?

It will and always has had a lot to do with aesthetics and framing. Why does the Haunted Mansion variably appear in Liberty Square, New Orleans Square, and Frontierland, depending on the park? Is that a failure of theme?

 

[Bleed0range]

Why are assuming that a Villains land would be lacking conflict or any clashes with hero’s?

The opportunity to botch a villains land is high but it can be great if executed well. It shouldn’t be a home for ALL the villains. I’m picturing Maleficent’s castle as the centerpiece surrounded by a dark forest. Included would be villains like Maleficent, Chernabog, the Wicked Witch, the Headless Horseman and the Horned King. In other words, the villains that would feel right in that setting and (by looking at this list) also happen to be the darkest of all the villains. Gaston or Scar wouldn’t fit in. Neither would Jafar but he should be saved for a proper Aladdin attraction dark ride anyway. Ursula is in the sea and has enough representation. The Queen of Hearts, Cruella or Captain Hook wouldn’t fit the tone of what I’m picturing either.

This would work very much how Fantasyland at Disneyland works. All the IP fits with the setting of the land. With all of that said I could see room for some of the villains I excluded in a well thought out E ticket. Just not out and about or having their own attractions.

I think an E ticket state of the art attraction with a story and vibe similar to Fantasmic! would be pretty popular.

 

[celluloid]

I think an E ticket state of the art attraction with a story and vibe similar to Fantasmic! would be pretty popular.

That would be fun. But a collage of villain characters attraction would seem odd if they fight Mickey and not all the heroes. We don't need yet another attraction Starring Mickey. And a collage single E ticket concept kind of works better for Fantasyland.

 

[The Leader of the Club]

That would be fun. But a collage of villain characters attraction would seem odd if they fight Mickey and not all the heroes. We don't need yet another attraction Starring Mickey. And a collage single E ticket concept kind of works better for Fantasyland.

I don’t think they’d be opposing Mickey. I think they’d be opposing us.

I’m imagining a RoTR-esque story where we are trying to narrowly escape a group of baddies (Hades, Maleficent, Chernabog, etc.). Add an Ursula Spinner and a family coaster themed to Yzma or Oogie Boogie and you’ve got the makings of a great land.

 

[celluloid]

I don’t think they’d be opposing Mickey. I think they’d be opposing us.

I’m imagining a RoTR-esque story where we are trying to narrowly escape a group of baddies (Hades, Maleficent, Chernabog, etc.). Add an Ursula Spinner and a family coaster themed to Yzma or Oogie Boogie and you’ve got the makings of a great land.

That goes back to the old Bald Mountain proposal, which would fit, and really should be sitting right where Little Mermaid is.

 

[haveyoumetmark]

From Wikipedia (yes, I know it's not a reliable source, but it's as good a place as any to get a definition, and it seems to be correct): "A theme park is a type of amusement park that bases its structures and attractions around a central theme, often featuring multiple areas with different themes.

The type of theme park that Magic Kingdom is, and most theme parks actually, conform to the "multiple areas" aspect. No actual central theme, apart from in this case it's "magical". Disneyland is, erm, a land of Disney. Six Flags parks similar. And Universal. Some may go deeper with a central theme, e.g. Silver Dollar City which has the overarching old world, rustic feel. WDW's subsequent three parks were built around a specific, central theme. Deliberately.

Thing is, when a theme park does have a specific, central theme, and it was built for that purpose, it is actually expected that it sticks to that theme. That's not a bad thing. You're saying that once built, the theme shouldn't be adhered to.

Why shouldn't a parlk that is built to celebrate human achievements continie to have attractions built to clerebrate human achievements, for example? Why is it too rigid to stick to that theme? If it's not stuck to, the theme becomes irrlevant and it just becomes another "multiple areas" park with no central theme.

Universal's parks are like that and Disney is aspiring to convert its parks into that image, rather than continuing to keep the specific themes that certain parks were built for.

Disney isnt' really "going to some lengths" to fit things in appropriately (unless you mean the head-scratching that goes on after they've chosen what to do). The theme should be first and foremost in a park with a specific theme, and design attractions around that. Then there's no need to make things "fit". Once they've decided tgo tell a story about that theme, them (if they want to they should look at what movie IP could best tell that story. Not decide on the IP first and then try to make it fit.

That is not at all what I’m saying. Not even close.

I’m saying that people have really rigid, boring, flat, myopic interpretations of theme. Themes can be and are broad. They can and do encompass many things. They can also evolve over time. There is no one singular right way to stick to a theme. Everything is up to interpretation.

There are central themes and sub themes, lesser themes and grander themes. They don’t render each other irrelevant. Theme doesn’t mean tunnel vision.

 

[haveyoumetmark]

Anyway, back on topic: Does anyone find it odd that if Moana were to come to fruition, that would be 3 boat rides in Adventureland? Seems more than a little imbalanced.

 

[mickEblu]

Anyway, back on topic: Does anyone find it odd that if Moana were to come to fruition, that would be 3 boat rides in Adventureland? Seems more than a little imbalanced.

True but still less odd than two boat rides in Pandora. Besides wasn’t Moana going to be a flume ride?

 

[celluloid]

It will and always has had a lot to do with aesthetics and framing. Why does the Haunted Mansion variably appear in Liberty Square, New Orleans Square, and Frontierland, depending on the park? Is that a failure of theme?

Read your own comparison. Variably. And notice how those are in entire differently parks that complement the areas they are in. They don't directly compete with funny and grim ghosts in one and darker grim ghosts in the other.


If they opened a ghostly haunted house that are just the most grim-based ghosts across the park in an expansion...it would of course be awkward, as they belong with The Haunted Mansion.

That is more akin to Fantasyland and Villains.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Besides wasn’t Moana going to be a flume ride?

I had a vague memory of some talk in that direction but the log flume thing actually came from a spoof site. Seems like a strange thing to spoof but maybe it was commentary on Journey of Water not being thrilling enough?

I think the most verified speculation about the Moana ride involves the boat simulator patent that Disney applied for in 2022. Not sure how I feel about them going all-in on the simulation experiences, but if it’s a combination of a dark ride and a simulator that could be pretty cool.

 

[Jrb1979]

With this boat simulator with a screen and the rumored soarin clone for a Coco ride I feel it's too many screen based rides. Its funny how many complain about Universal having too many screen based rides, yet Disney does it and it's ok

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

With this boat simulator with a screen and the rumored soarin clone for a Coco ride I feel it's too many screen based rides. Its funny how many complain about Universal having too many screen based rides, yet Disney does it and it's ok

I don't think it's ok. I've been complaining about that since I've been on this board!

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The move towards the natural west and away from 1950s "cowboys and Indians trope has been afoot for a decade or more.

WDW's Frontierland was never heavily focused on cowboys and Indians.

That would have been the case had Western River Expedition been built, but it wasn't.

WDW's Frontierland has always had a backwoods look and was more about what you do in the wilderness and see there, than any mythical figures or heroes. Canoeing, exploring caves, shooting targets, seeing a saloon show. That any attractions or restaurants had names of literary or film characters attached was more to give a point of reference to set the guests mindset in place. You never saw Mike Fink or Pecos Bill, and they were not the point. Even Big Thunder Mountain shows the folly of digging for gold in the wrong place.

Contrast that with Disneyland Paris, both in and out of the park. Lots of cowboy and western mythology there.

 

[James Alucobond]

Read your own comparison. Variably. And notice how those are in entire differently parks that complement the areas they are in. They don't directly compete with funny and grim ghosts in one and darker grim ghosts in the other.


If they opened a ghostly haunted house that are just the most grim-based ghosts across the park in an expansion...it would of course be awkward, as they belong with The Haunted Mansion.

That is more akin to Fantasyland and Villains.

It can be approached from a number of angles.

Why does one park get three lands based on various aspects of Americana (Main Street U.S.A., Liberty Square, Frontierland) even though they could conceivably be melded together or have some attractions moved between them?

Why do Aladdin and Moana go in Adventureland in spite of having a lot of overlap with Fantasyland as fantasy royalty?

Why can the same attraction be imported into different lands in different parks and still work with a bit of recontextualization?

As long as there is a discrete mission statement for the villain area and the attractions within fulfill it, it's fine. I agree that there are a lot of ways to mess it up, and I tend to agree that having it just be "dark Fantasyland" is one of them, but just because it is also rooted in fantasy does not mean it cannot be executed successfully.