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

[MagicHappens1971]

I also never said Marvel Studios or Lucasfilms were "dying." I said they have a limited lifetime. They aren't on their death beds currently, but both studios are in decline. I am a massive Marvel Comics fan and I simply have no good will for the MCU left in me, ditto for many of my friends who are also Marvel Comics fans. While I am not a big fan of Star Wars, would you really argue that the brand is in as good a position now as it was, say, in 2015? Or that the Disney+ shows have made up the good will they list due to the sequel trilogy?

I don’t follow the Marvel comics but have been a big MCU fan for a while, and in my personal opinion, there were plenty of pre-Endgame projects that I dislike as much as some of the post-Endgame projects. That’s just my opinion though.

I would say the Star Wars brand was severely injured by TLJ & ROS. I think Disney/Lucasfilm have been actively trying to repair the mistakes they’ve made in the past. Mando has been extremely popular and is a very well done show. I don’t like to view franchises/media with “goodwill” and such as some do.

Marvel is a whole other ballgame, but the Star Wars “brand” has been put through the wringer for the past 40+ years. There’s those who love the originals, those who love the prequels, and those who love the sequels. And for the same token, those who hate each of those time periods.

If you ask someone born in 1960, then in 1990 and then again in 2005, what their current opinion is on Star Wars, they will vary greatly.

 

[BlakeW39]

They have to live with any new attractions and lands they build for a long time, and they have to rely on them to maintain guest interest for the foreseeable future. Yes, that's perfectly possible using IP developed specifically for the parks, but it's easy to see why they might prefer to rely on proven properties, particularly when you factor in potential merchandising opportunities in gift shops and whatnot. A bad film or television show, while still expensive, is much easier to put in the rear-view mirror. That said, it would be nice to see a bit more balance even if I understand the logic of not doing so.

Yeah I mean I agree with you, there are obvious benefits and less risk involved in using existing IPs for parks expansions, rather than creating new IPs specifically for the parks.

But I also believe there exists an economic strategy that is also valid, and includes or at least allows innovation and creativity in the parks on some level. Rather than just leveraging your other brands like Pixar and Star Wars and so on and so forth.

I apologize if my points seemed like an absolute, they are my opinions based on years following these boards and being a life long Disney fan.

Making a land/attraction off an established IP would be a more financially sound choice. Most of what I was saying was about the business side of it.

haha, no need to apologize my friend. I'm simply suggesting that, as I said above, that recycling existing IPs for the park, while it has obvious benefits, is not uniformly an objectively superior business decision compared to creating new IPs for the parks. There are certain benefits associated with making new things in the parks, just like there is in every other of Disney's entertainment divisions.

 

[BlakeW39]

I don’t follow the Marvel comics but have been a big MCU fan for a while, and in my personal opinion, there were plenty of pre-Endgame projects that I dislike as much as some of the post-Endgame projects. That’s just my opinion though.

I would say the Star Wars brand was severely injured by TLJ & ROS. I think Disney/Lucasfilm have been actively trying to repair the mistakes they’ve made in the past. Mando has been extremely popular and is a very well done show. I don’t like to view franchises/media with “goodwill” and such as some do.

Marvel is a whole other ballgame, but the Star Wars “brand” has been put through the wringer for the past 40+ years. There’s those who love the originals, those who love the prequels, and those who love the sequels. And for the same token, those who hate each of those time periods.

If you ask someone born in 1960, then in 1990 and then again in 2005, what their current opinion is on Star Wars, they will vary greatly.

Mmm. I think being an MCU fan rather than a Marvel fan in general has created the perception within you that Star Wars is a more long standing brand than Marvel is.

Marvel however is a more long standing and versatile brand than Star Wars. Not that Star Wars isn't hugely popular, but Marvel had cultural influence before than Star Wars and is a larger company than Lucas Films is. So I'd wager that Marvel has just as much, if not more, a chance of surviving indefinitely compared to Star Wars. They're almost apples to oranges. Star Wars is a franchise, with various entries and spin offs. Marvel is an entertainment company that owns various franchises which themselves have various entries and spins offs of their own.

 

[UNCgolf]

Mmm. I think being an MCU fan rather than a Marvel fan in general has created the perception within you that Star Wars is a more long standing brand than Marvel is.

Marvel however is a more long standing and versatile brand than Star Wars. Not that Star Wars isn't hugely popular, but Marvel had cultural influence before than Star Wars and is a larger company than Lucas Films is. So I'd wager that Marvel has just as much, if not more, a chance of surviving indefinitely compared to Star Wars. They're almost apples to oranges. Star Wars is a franchise, with various entries and spin offs. Marvel is an entertainment company that owns various franchises which themselves have various entries and spins offs of their own.

Marvel is only larger than Lucasfilm because of the MCU, though. While comic books were relatively popular, they never sold issues on anything close to the scale of tickets to a blockbuster movie (nor did they sell toys the way something like Star Wars did).

Marvel was actually bankrupt in the 1990s.

 

[BlakeW39]

Marvel is only larger than Lucasfilm because of the MCU, though. While comic books were relatively popular, they never sold issues on anything close to the scale of tickets to a blockbuster movie (nor did they sell toys the way something like Star Wars did).

Marvel was actually bankrupt in the 1990s.

Ehhh... fair enough. Marvel has produced much more entertainment though, has had more comics, TV shows, films, etc (pre MCU) and was successful before Star Wars. While Star Wars' films sold better individually than Marvel's comics, that's because films sell more than individual comics. Most of this isn't predicated on the MCU mind you.

I may be biased, because anecdotally Star Wars always felt niche to me. I never had any friends who cared for the franchise, and I have only seen two films. Many of my friends and family members haven't seen any.

Also, just as an aside. Marvel didn't actually go bankrupt in the 90s. The comic book industry collapsed and they almosy went bankrupt, but it was only shortly after that point that they released popular blockbuster films in X-Men and Spider-Mqn

 

[UNCgolf]

Ehhh... fair enough. Marvel has produced much more entertainment though, has had more comics, TV shows, films, etc (pre MCU) and was successful before Star Wars. While Star Wars' films sold better individually than Marvel's comics, that's because films sell more than individual comics. Most of this isn't predicated on the MCU mind you.

I may be biased, because anecdotally Star Wars always felt niche to me. I never had any friends who cared for the franchise, and I have only seen two films. Many of my friends and family members haven't seen any.

Also, just as an aside. Marvel didn't actually go bankrupt in the 90s. The comic book industry collapsed and they almosy went bankrupt, but it was only shortly after that point that they released popular blockbuster films in X-Men and Spider-Mqn

Marvel didn't really release those films, though -- they sold the rights to help prop up the company. You're right that the whole industry collapsed, though.

Neither Marvel nor DC were remotely on the level of Star Wars (and not solely Star Wars; it just happens to be the biggest of the big). It was one of the biggest movies of all time. Actual comic books have always been a bit of a niche; even at the height of their popularity the best selling issues were generally only moving a few hundred thousand copies. Not to say they were unpopular (which they certainly weren't) or they'd have never bothered using them for TV shows and films in the first place, but those other forms of media definitely reached more people than the actual comic books themselves.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that the highest selling comic books in the 1970s were Star Wars comics released after the film, and that they absolutely dwarfed the sales of all other Marvel and DC books.

 

[The Mom]

Posters are straying OT again.

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

 

[SplashJacket]

I feel like this is actually an appropriate thread to go off topic. In the many TBA threads, the off topic posts are very annoying since the focus of the threat is very focused, whereas for Beyond Big Thunder, since we don’t exactly know what they’re doing, the thread already has a super broad scope. What lands? What’s in those lands? Why those lands? Why not others? How will they do it? Will they do it? Will it have phases? Why are they choosing to expand in this way? What does this mean for the other parks? How does this compare to other expansions? Why single IP lands? Are these plans realistic?

I’m not sure if there were other posts that were purged, but the discussion immediately before it seems to have naturally developed from talking about the IPs within the suggested lands and how they relate to other IPs to a tangentially related IP relevancy discussion for a few posts.

Not really an issue either way, but as someone who generally enjoys an on-topic thread, I don’t really think monitoring the thread heavily is necessary, unlike some others.

 

[FigmentFan82]

Agreed! Since the idea of this is wholly speculative and not concrete in any way shape or form, broad discussion that strays here and there should be very welcomed in this thread. If Disney is just tossing out possible ideas for an MK expansion beyond Big Thunder, then so can we!

 

[ToTBellHop]

Agreed! Since the idea of this is wholly speculative and not concrete in any way shape or form, broad discussion that strays here and there should be very welcomed in this thread. If Disney is just tossing out possible ideas for an MK expansion beyond Big Thunder, then so can we!

Isn’t there an Imagineering forum for such spit-balling? WDI is considering a handful of ideas. They are currently fleshing out a Villain Land to provide options to Bob but WDI isn’t very efficient. Unfortunately. Do they not realize they should hurry up and get something approved before a recession torpedos everything and we end up with a Rapunzel flat ride and call it a day?

 

[The Mom]

The problem is not posters speculating, but discussing other parks, movies, etc. Speculating about what should go into the Big Thunder Mountain area is fine.

 

[FigmentFan82]

Isn’t there an Imagineering forum for such spit-balling? WDI is considering a handful of ideas. They are currently fleshing out a Villain Land to provide options to Bob but WDI isn’t very efficient. Unfortunately. Do they not realize they should hurry up and get something approved before a recession torpedos everything and we end up with a Rapunzel flat ride and call it a day?

I don't know about another thread. But this one obv pertains to this specific area earmarked for a potential expansion, so mostly implying that it's not generalized armchair imagineering but localized to this specific plot of land

 

[mysto]

Do they not realize they should hurry up and get something approved before a recession torpedos everything and we end up with a Rapunzel flat ride and call it a day?

It's worse to get it approved then cancel it due to economics. Which does seem really likely right now I agree.

If they can keep a secret it's probably best for WDI to keep it as long as they can. Also prevents the "5 years to build" complaints as that clock hasn't started ticking yet.

 

[ToTBellHop]

It's worse to get it approved then cancel it due to economics. Which does seem really likely right now I agree.

If they can keep a secret it's probably best for WDI to keep it as long as they can. Also prevents the "5 years to build" complaints as that clock hasn't started ticking yet.

Keep it a secret from us? Sure. Get Bob to green light something while he’s interested in doing so and still CEO? Get it done. Soon enough, we wait for the next CEO and that will prevent any new projects for awhile.

If they announce a new land, they won’t cancel it. Modify? Sure. That always happens.

I want a Villain Land to finally be a commitment.

 

[FigmentFan82]

I would hope they realize that, economics aside, they have the capital if they were to choose to spend it. They seem to be somewhat aware that expansion is needed and that Universal can't simply be ignored anymore. Disney has historically been very conservative with their spending and additions, but if ever there was a time to make a big splash with several new projects that aren't kneecapped by budget cuts, then this is that time!

 

[ToTBellHop]

I would hope they realize that, economics aside, they have the capital if they were to choose to spend it. They seem to be somewhat aware that expansion is needed and that Universal can't simply be ignored anymore. Disney has historically been very conservative with their spending and additions, but if ever there was a time to make a big splash with several new projects that aren't kneecapped by budget cuts, then this is that time!

Especially at the pace they build. They need to approve soon if they want it this decade!

 

[MisterPenguin]

they have the capital if they were to choose to spend it.

Not so much.

Wall Street is hammering TWDC for not giving out dividends and blaming the current (and temporary) losses at streaming.

In order to keep investing (and loss-leading) on streaming, the excess capital goes there. Then a bunch has to go to kick-start dividends.

It won't be until streaming is net positive in 2024 that TWDC will have all that excess capital they used to have for major park capex.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Keep it a secret from us? Sure. Get Bob to green light something while he’s interested in doing so and still CEO? Get it done. Soon enough, we wait for the next CEO and that will prevent any new projects for awhile.

If they announce a new land, they won’t cancel it. Modify? Sure. That always happens.

I want a Villain Land to finally be a commitment.

I'd love to see them get really serious about it and open Villains Land in MK before the end of 2026.

I won't waste a precious moment of my time on earth believing they will, but boy would it be nice.

 

[BlakeW39]

To me a Villains Land has an appeal like Cars Land. If executed correctly, it could legitimately among the be the best in the world and would be crazy popular.

Honestly, I wouldn’t mind Cars Land either.

Yeah but where would they even put a Cars Land? DHS? I guess that park is just a hodgepodge of IP now to be fair.

 

[J4546]

please dont clone Cars land in USA. Its an amazing land and CA is super lucky to have it but Give DHS something excusive imo