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

[G00fyDad]

Doesnt HS have a couple of expansion pads for both SWL and TSL? Also VotLM sitting dormant for how long now and hasnt Indy stunt show been discussed as a potential area for expansion beyondthe parks current boundaries?

Yes but they are moving forward with Indy 5 and I doubt they want to tear that out before that is even in theaters.

 

[crazy4disney]

Yes but they are moving forward with Indy 5 and I doubt they want to tear that out before that is even in theaters.

I wouldnt remove the Indy IP i would remove the stunt show and possibly build the coaster or Cali Indy ride there....

 

[Nthderivative]

Most of the backfil needed to build Epcot came from the property where CBR and Pop/Art are today. Galaxy’s edge came from across World Drive where a large lake is now located.

Partly true, they still had to ship in sand from Champions gate. My barber in Clermont has lived in Florida all his life and his grandfather owned acers of land along 27 in Champions gate. He remembers his dad selling sand to Disney in the 80s while they were building Epcot.

 

[_caleb]

I'm not sure I follow. Do not see / agree their creative juices flowing on the projects they're cranking out at Tokyo DisneySea? Those are WDI projects as well. They're just projects that Oriental land company is willing to spend on.

Whether or not those projects are too expensive is a different argument, but from a creative standpoint, I think WDI is still there. They're not creatively bankrupt.

I mean that WDI isn’t a collection of Imagineers like it once was. Now it’s a bureaucratic project management department that hires contractors (many of them former WDI Imagineers) for specific projects.

So these days, the quality of a WDI projects largely depends on which project and creative leads a particular project is assigned to.

Also, I think we could argue that the more important a project is to Disney execs, the less room there is for creativity.

 

[_caleb]

Not what I would've done back there (assuming this ever happens) but, unlike some other things they've done or are planning, I can at least see some the rationale.

Coco's Mexican vibe plays off the existing southwest Frontier theme. The Spanish language obviously ties Encanto in with Coco. The best way to execute this so as to provide some long term flexibility is to do it as a, for lack of a better term, Fiesta Village with both IPs living in the same general space as opposed to two distinct mini-lands. Something like that would allow for Three Caballeros or a rebooted Zorro to be slotted in later and not seem out of place. Its really not in line with the original Frontierland concept but I bet they want to move away from the Davey Crockett-esque iteration of Frontierland anyway due its problematic elements.

Villains obviously is playing off the darker Haunted Mansion vibe. Judging by the concept art, its the least flushed out concept. How the former and ladder transition to one another is a little harder to see. The concept art makes it look like Coco is closer to Big Thunder but Coco's Dia de Los Muertos focus clearly seems to be more of a thematic match with Mansion or villains. I am not a huge villains as a land guy so if they must go this route, I hope they dump the idea and give us Nightmare Before Christmas' Halloweentown instead.

I don't think doing any of this should require complete removal of Rivers of America. Ideally (at least ideally as it relates to this specific scenario), it should just shortened like what was done at Disneyland - the northern bend being significantly reduced, curving immediately behind Fort Langhorn. WDRR either gets subsequently pushed north/northwest to keep it on the periphery or pulled in closer to the new northern bend a la Disneyland but perhaps with a tunnel through the Villains section to keep it out of sight?

That said, if I were a betting man, I would put my money on a permanently docked riverboat with TSI and ROA as we know it ceasing to exist. It would allow them to reconfigure if not remove the canal used to to take the riverboat backstage for maintenance which makes extending pedestrian access north of Big Thunder much easier.

Again, I don’t think this should be taken as an actual “announcement” of any kind. But I do see promise in the line of thinking you show here: attention given to thematic transitions. This is so extremely well done at DLR, and so rarely even attempted at MK.

I want to see more thematically similar lands with thoughtful transitions from one to the next.

 

[doctornick]

Encanto and Coco don’t seem that big.

Also, did some digging. Those who postulate that we would lose some of RoA and TSI are correct.

I don't get it.

WDW/MK has the "blessing of size" and literally acres of land that could be easily developed for these projects that would preserve the RoA and TSI and actually provide some good coverage to prevent visual intrusions/sightline issues (they could easily be built outside the RR berm).

DL has a massive constraint of space including support buildings yet was able to build Galaxy's Edge without substantially losing anything (yes the RR now has a new bend and the RoA is somewhat shorter, but generally it is the same) in the park. The are able to add MMRR without losing another attraction. It's absolutely bonkers how they go out of their way to use every square inch of DL and not replace anything while at WDW they can't be bothered to use land that is just sitting there undeveloped.

Pretty close although more of RoA should remain.

Would the path to Coco/Encanto from Frontierland go in front of BTMRR - such that they have to fill in the river to make that not a dead end?

Or does it go from behind Splash (where the railroad station is) and past the backside of BTMRR and go over the canal (the one that leads to the Seven Seas Lagoon)?

 

[doctornick]

Im sure it will be but again does it fit the needs of the guests that visit Florida? Unfortunately i dont think it will.

We often are saying here that Disney needs to build more smaller scale attraction to balance and support the larger/expensive E-tickets that they favor. JoW is exactly the type of attraction. It's a good thing that they are willing to build it and we need more of that.

 

[James Alucobond]

I don't get it.

WDW/MK has the "blessing of size" and literally acres of land that could be easily developed for these projects that would preserve the RoA and TSI and actually provide some good coverage to prevent visual intrusions/sightline issues (they could easily be built outside the RR berm).

DL has a massive constraint of space including support buildings yet was able to build Galaxy's Edge without substantially losing anything (yes the RR now has a new bend and the RoA is somewhat shorter, but generally it is the same) in the park. The are able to add MMRR without losing another attraction. It's absolutely bonkers how they go out of their way to use every square inch of DL and not replace anything while at WDW they can't be bothered to use land that is just sitting there undeveloped.

I doubt they’d ditch the island directly across from the Liberty Bell. They’d just absorb the island behind it, keeping views from Frontierland and Liberty Square pretty much free of intrusion from new areas.

 

[crazy4disney]

We often are saying here that Disney needs to build more smaller scale attraction to balance and support the larger/expensive E-tickets that they favor. JoW is exactly the type of attraction. It's a good thing that they are willing to build it and we need more of that.

i agree thats what the parks need... BUT to me they need rides not attractions... kids enjoy going on rides not walking thru an elaborate que which ends with no ride... just how i feel... yes this will be an addition they need when it comes to a demand that will not overrun the park but will it create enough demand to scatter crowds to offset the lack of capacity the park has...

 

[doctornick]

Should we expect about the same lost as Disneyland had with Star Wars?

I'd be okay with that. The RoL is largely the same, the island only lost a bit of the edge that wasn't otherwise being used IIRC.

A bit more of a reduction. Did DL have to shorten the Mark Twain/SS Columbia route?

Shortened the route a bit but all the water traffic is still in play so I don't think it was a big trade off.

If these changes to MK would only result in a a somewhat shorter river and loss of only part of the upper island (but keeping the fort), I'd be okay with it. But I'm fearing that only the lower island will remain and we lose the Riverboat going around.

 

[doctornick]

I doubt they’d ditch the island directly across from the Liberty Bell. They’d just absorb the island behind it, keeping views from Frontierland and Liberty Square pretty much free of intrusion from new areas.

The more northern island has the fort and it would be sad to lose that. also, if they shorten the river too much, it would make it impossible or pointless to run the Riverboat around.

Also, I'd wonder if they want to keep the canal to the 7 Seas Lagoon. If so, I'd have to imagine they'd only use the top part of the upper island and might be able to leave the fort intact. That would pretty much require them to do a path from behind Splash and over the canal though I'd think.

 

[ToTBellHop]

I'd be okay with that. The RoL is largely the same, the island only lost a bit of the edge that wasn't otherwise being used IIRC.



Shortened the route a bit but all the water traffic is still in play so I don't think it was a big trade off.

If these changes to MK would only result in a a somewhat shorter river and loss of only part of the upper island (but keeping the fort), I'd be okay with it. But I'm fearing that only the lower island will remain and we lose the Riverboat going around.

Fort should be safe. Something like

 

[gerarar]

Rip perimeter firework launch sites

Actually, I think not really. Project Nugget added two new launch sites adjacent to the main launch, #1.

#2 is new, and #3 & #4 are older ones. #4 is no longer used, which is symmetrical/reflected by the launch site next to Tron on the east launch sites, which also is not used anymore. Notice how #3 was updated in the 2022 picture with new concrete work and such.

Therefore, with the current perimeter configurations, they are safe from the beyond-BTMR expansions, imo. #4 is directly in the path of the expansion, but since it's been retired...

2022 aerial with new launchers:

Compared to this 2017 aerial:

 

[ToTBellHop]

If they are really ambitious and shift the WDWRR like at DL, you get

 

[_caleb]

i agree thats what the parks need... BUT to me they need rides not attractions... kids enjoy going on rides not walking thru an elaborate que which ends with no ride... just how i feel... yes this will be an addition they need when it comes to a demand that will not overrun the park but will it create enough demand to scatter crowds to offset the lack of capacity the park has...

To me, this is an old-fashioned way of thinking. The lines between themed area, queue, dining, and ride (and gift shop) have been blurred so much over the years that I’m not sure kids these days value one over the other as much you seem to think.

Queues are grander, rides are shorter and “cheaper,” and merch areas are maximized because that’s what brings in money.

 

[crazy4disney]

To me, this is an old-fashioned way of thinking. The lines between themed area, queue, dining, and ride (and gift shop) have been blurred so much over the years that I’m not sure kids these days value one over the other as much you seem to think.

Queues are grander, rides are shorter and “cheaper,” and merch areas are maximized because that’s what brings in money.

I can only go by my experiences and others i know with children who go there and visit which obviously is a pimple on the radar…. Im just saying imo if you ask kids who enjoy Moana would they rather a ride or some walk thru… my gambling money is going on a ride vs some walk thru they are building. Again the ride doesnt need to be some state if the art attraction just something nice and simple etc. Look at Frozen the ride is literally a bare minimum for that IP yet still vastly popular years later

 

[SteamboatJoe]

Fort should be safe. Something like
View attachment 666242

This is what I have envisioned previously and its comparable to the revised length at DL (approx. 0.4 miles).

 

[Brer Oswald]

To me, this is an old-fashioned way of thinking. The lines between themed area, queue, dining, and ride (and gift shop) have been blurred so much over the years that I’m not sure kids these days value one over the other as much you seem to think.

Queues are grander, rides are shorter and “cheaper,” and merch areas are maximized because that’s what brings in money.

I don’t think it is so much about value as it is about guest flow. With a ride, you are moving guests at a desired pace. With a walk through attraction, you have little to no control over that.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Fort should be safe. Something like
View attachment 666242

So what's the thought (or isn't there any) about the design aesthetic of the lands branching off of the Hub? Is that just out the window? Or is this all part of Fantasyland? If so, "Beyond Big Thunder Mountain" is a weird way for them to have phrased the intro.

 

[ToTBellHop]

So what's the thought (or isn't there any) about the design aesthetic of the lands branching off of the Hub? Is that just out the window? Or is this all part of Fantasyland? If so, "Beyond Big Thunder Mountain" is a weird way for them to have phrased the intro.

Didn’t that go away over 30 years ago with Mickey’s Birthday Land?