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

Phicinfan

Well-Known Member
I didn’t say you can’t add in magic kingdom…they have done too little there as well

But you gotta close the gap. Every open Gate is sunk overhead and lost potential revenue if you don’t get people into them. So having one park draw 30-60% more than the others is stupid. That’s an operational deficiency you correct.
I doubt they know how to correct it. By all matter, the Star Wars move should have been a full blown out land with more ride options and eating options, and they cheaped it down. I will say TSL is better than I hoped, and with the added sit down restaurant they have filled it nicely. But too much wasted space in DHS that desperately needs more supports your view above, just don't see them hitting the right thing to do so.

I for one would welcome the Moana area in AK if done well and more than just a ride. - so not holding my breath there.
Adding more to Avatar with the second movie having come out as well would make sense.

Epcot is just a mess, adding any more there until they finish the middle is just a waste IMO.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I doubt they know how to correct it. By all matter, the Star Wars move should have been a full blown out land with more ride options and eating options, and they cheaped it down. I will say TSL is better than I hoped, and with the added sit down restaurant they have filled it nicely. But too much wasted space in DHS that desperately needs more supports your view above, just don't see them hitting the right thing to do so.

I for one would welcome the Moana area in AK if done well and more than just a ride. - so not holding my breath there.
Adding more to Avatar with the second movie having come out as well would make sense.

Epcot is just a mess, adding any more there until they finish the middle is just a waste IMO.
I agree with you…but you can’t take any of that chapek nonsense from last year seriously…that was a sad gimmick/cry for help
 

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
After going to DLR for the first time... Frontierland can be very tiny and still be effective. The whole land is less than 5 acres:
1681918706562.png

WDW could make a similar move with the land behind thunder/splash

1681919087462.png

Why does our big thunder look so much bigger on google maps?
 

co10064

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
After going to DLR for the first time... Frontierland can be very tiny and still be effective. The whole land is less than 5 acres:
View attachment 711223
WDW could make a similar move with the land behind thunder/splash

View attachment 711225
Why does our big thunder look so much bigger on google maps?
I definitely respect your opinion (to each his own), but I actually had the opposite feeling when I visited Disneyland for the first time (having frequented WDW my whole life).

IMO Disneyland's Frontierland is so small that it doesn't feel like there's much to it besides Big Thunder.

If you didn't know Disneyland's history, you might even think that Big Thunder was awkwardly shoehorned in. WDW's is much better, with DLP's being the best (I have never visited Tokyo).
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
I definitely respect your opinion (to each his own), but I actually had the opposite feeling when I visited Disneyland for the first time (having frequented WDW my whole life).

IMO Disneyland's Frontierland is so small that it doesn't feel like there's much to it besides Big Thunder.

If you didn't know Disneyland's history, you might even think that Big Thunder was awkwardly shoehorned in. WDW's is much better, with DLP's being the best (I have never visited Tokyo).

Yeah, that would probably be my take as well with DL vs MK. DL was definitely more robust when it had the ranch/petting zoo and BBQ place which was lost for Galaxy's Edge.
 

bmr1591

Well-Known Member
While the idea of a Villains Park is great and something I'd certainly support, I do wonder if that's the vision Disney would go with. When I look at the current parks, there seems to be a theme to them all (magic, conservation, the future/world, entertainment). Villains just doesn't fall in line with what they've done with other parks. Not to say it couldn't happen, I'm just not so sure it will.
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
While the idea of a Villains Park is great and something I'd certainly support, I do wonder if that's the vision Disney would go with. When I look at the current parks, there seems to be a theme to them all (magic, conservation, the future/world, entertainment). Villains just doesn't fall in line with what they've done with other parks. Not to say it couldn't happen, I'm just not so sure it will.
While I wouldn't call villains a "phase", I think the over-the-top fascination with them is definitely something of a trend, and I don't feel it makes sense as the overarching theme for an entire park. It doesn't really fit with Disney's brand image and would probably feel really oppressive and one-note as its own thing.
 

Phicinfan

Well-Known Member
While I wouldn't call villains a "phase", I think the over-the-top fascination with them is definitely something of a trend, and I don't feel it makes sense as the overarching theme for an entire park. It doesn't really fit with Disney's brand image and would probably feel really oppressive and one-note as its own thing.
Oh come on, who wouldn't want a reverse MK? Considering most here feel Epcot and DHS are already moving to another MK, you could do the same with the 5th gate but do it with Disney IP ...

Space Mountain - going to Black Hole?
Big Thunder - Journey to the center of the earth(not sure this is a disney property.....)
Just focus on the key major villians of Disney and you could have a ton of fun creating rides for that.
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
Oh come on, who wouldn't want a reverse MK?
Me, I guess. Having a pseudo-opposite to every ride doesn't sound terribly compelling, nor do I want to go to a park where the theme will likely frequently hinge on darkness and malice. I like EPCOT because it's a beautiful park that's a joy to simply inhabit. While you could probably fit some beauty into a villains park by incorporating, say, a Gothic cathedral or something of the sort instead of a castle, I imagine there would ultimately be a lot of focus on dead trees, jagged rocks, thorns, etc. To me, that's fine in doses, but I don't want to wander through that for hours on end.
 

Ayla

Well-Known Member
While I wouldn't call villains a "phase", I think the over-the-top fascination with them is definitely something of a trend, and I don't feel it makes sense as the overarching theme for an entire park. It doesn't really fit with Disney's brand image and would probably feel really oppressive and one-note as its own thing.
I totally agree, which is why I think the talk of a Villains area is pie-in-the-sky.
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
I totally agree, which is why I think the talk of a Villains area is pie-in-the-sky.
I think it can work in isolation, especially as a fully covered mini-land courtyard of eternal night with a couple of rides and supplementary shops or restaurants. I just don't think it would be that great if extended across multiple lands. It's an aesthetic that gets tired quickly.
 

bmr1591

Well-Known Member
Oh come on, who wouldn't want a reverse MK? Considering most here feel Epcot and DHS are already moving to another MK, you could do the same with the 5th gate but do it with Disney IP ...

Space Mountain - going to Black Hole?
Big Thunder - Journey to the center of the earth(not sure this is a disney property.....)
Just focus on the key major villians of Disney and you could have a ton of fun creating rides for that.

I think this idea would be far better as a projection for a 'Mickey's Scary Halloween Party' night.
 

Phicinfan

Well-Known Member
Me, I guess. Having a pseudo-opposite to every ride doesn't sound terribly compelling, nor do I want to go to a park where the theme will likely frequently hinge on darkness and malice. I like EPCOT because it's a beautiful park that's a joy to simply inhabit. While you could probably fit some beauty into a villains park by incorporating, say, a Gothic cathedral or something of the sort instead of a castle, I imagine there would ultimately be a lot of focus on dead trees, jagged rocks, thorns, etc. To me, that's fine in doses, but I don't want to wander through that for hours on end.
Having thought about this I disagree. What is the main draw of WDW - MK. Why would an "opposite" MK NOT be a draw? You get the same rides, less crowding as its spread over two parks, and the advantage of a new "difference" in that its toward the villian side. I get you could really play up the option for Halloween and such, but to me this really could make a dent in over crowding of MK. Now obviously you would not copy every ride over, especially the newer stuff like Encanto or such ... but it is Disney so its like Haunted Mansion expanded so not all that scary or malevolent
 

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

Back
Top Bottom