I posted earlier on here, about my opinion and disappointment in this rumor. Hopefully they reconsider, as I completely understand the reasoning behind wanting new and edgy stuff. Whether that be a thrill ride, or anything. The risk however, and there is one that many who want more and new stuff do not realize, is that what you put in it's place may be no more magical or even entertaining or more of a draw then what is already there. I cited Mission Space, though that may not have been completely fair, as the ride is just not my type of attraction. As I recall though when they built it, it was a very expensive, state of the art ride that was supposed to blow the doors off Epcot, and for awhile I think it actually did that. However, I don't forsee that time as being now. I think most would agree that Soarin, with it's popularity and the fact that most age groups can experience it and enjoy it has actually succeeded in what Mission Space was designed for. In ways I'm going to be critical of Mission Space, and I really don't have a ton against it, but more simply using it as an example that it is no way the most guilty example of.
Many thrill rides are significant because of some breakthrough that they have achieved, whether it be corkscrews or speed or height or launch, or any other means you wish to view them through. What happens to those rides when other companies create rides that surpass them. Rides are always evolving, and if Disney World made the fastest roller coaster on the planet, 5 years from then it likely wouldn't be in the top five. What is it after that? What is it when it's just another coaster. I've seen rides at local theme parks, rides that were major draws become scrap metal because the main reason for their existence was completely shattered by other newer rides. Unless of course the coaster wasn't just another, like Space Mountain. Pirates of the Caribbean and it's a small world could be competitive for being the single most major attraction ever unveiled at any theme park in the world. However, their ride is just a boat. Neither ride, was ever the fastest moving, nor the tallest reaching. You may go 0 to 4 in a half a minute. You are in the exact same boats on both attractions, yet the artistry and attention to details, and the emersive songs and joy they bring guests is uncalculble. Both rides that have nothing to do with any Disney movie or cartoon before they were unveiled, and both have become icons of the theme park genre. The Tiki Room birds have an artistry to them, that many of the modern rides do not. Small world is a living tribute to Mary Blair and her wonderful artistry with colors. To remove that, would be like going to a museum and taking a mural off the wall and stating no one will ever see it, ever again. Sure, you can always put up another painting, but whether it will be anything of note is questionable. It is true there are multiple Tiki Rooms, so there is that, but I get disheartened when people complain about something they can just ignore. When I've been in an art museum there are dozens if not hundreds of pieces of artwork I am not impressed with, nor do they have any great meaning to me. Personally, I think I would be out of line to go inside it, and then complain about how the individual paintings in the place that I disliked should be removed or changed. Yes, the idea and wonder of what could be put in the attractions spot is limitless, and it could be great, but it also could be the newest version of Imagination, or Stitch's Great Escape. Building a new attraction, like Rock n Roller Coaster back in the day was more beneficial, as at the very least you weren't denying fans something they loved, for the betterment of other fans. The ideal, and even logical plan should be, if at all possible, build the new, and keep the old. Adding Guardians of the Galaxy to Twilight Zone Tower of Terror risks ticking off some people, as you are denying them the chance to ride their favorite ride, solely to impress or interest another group of fans that may be larger or may be smaller (with some crossover interests). Why not just keep ToT, and build Guardians. That I think is more the point to all these complaints. When an attraction is removed, it's not like a movie that leaves movie theaters for other newer movies but is still available. It literally is, that the ride will no longer be available to be experienced ever again, at least at WDW. It's not the fear, disinterest, or even uneasiness of what may be to come, it's the loss of not having something you treasured be available in any way, shape or form at WDW. I made a comparison to Casablanca before, and how people can always watch it on their TVs. Imagine if that wasn't the case though, and the film studio announced that they were releasing Casablanca or The Godfather to movie theaters one last time, and that it would never be shown ever again, nor would it be available for purchase or streaming. It would simply be gone. If you weren't born before then, then you are out of luck, or if you want to experience it again, once again, you're out of luck. How would that make some people feel? Thankfully movies are things we have the benefit of enjoying and reliving throughout the years.
Disney has always been the best parks in the world for being enjoyable for everyone. Never in there did I say everything would be enjoyed by everyone, but that everyone can find something to enjoy. Most theme parks are stacked to the gills with thrill rides, and unless you are high schooler or young adult, you quickly get bored with the options, and have to go to the gift shops, midway games or restaurants to find any reason for even being there. Obviously for thrill ride junkies, they love that, which is great for them. Disney World was not designed for thrill seekers. It was designed for families. I don't even mean a slam against thrill rides as they are obviously very important for theme parks to have, and have quite a few differing styles. The concept though of an attraction being outdated or lame is one that once again is difficult to accept. Hollywood has long since said that the western as a film genre is basically dead, having moved on to sci fi, even though many of the movies can be traced back to westerns. Does that mean Frontierland should be completely abandoned? I mean, the wild west as an adventure isn't really that popular of a concept anymore? No, it shouldn't because it's an intrical part of Disney World, and has given rise to such blockbusters as Splash Mountain and Big Thunder Mountain Railroad, not to mention Wilderness Lodge and Fort Wilderness.
Disney loves to talk about "magic" as it's obvious due to it's connections to fantasy, and the way guests experience the parks. Many an entertainment critic has sat down and tried to explain the "it factor" when talking about entertainers or actors. For every reason under the sun, those that they analyze should come up short, should not even really be in the same sentence as others, who are more obviously knowledgable or experienced. However some unique people have "IT." That's the magic Disney is talking about. For many who watched Elvis, or Hendrix, or Marilyn, people who at the very least, early on in their careers were not students of the fields they became legends in, but what they possessed was....magic. The Enchanted Tiki Room has that. It has that more (at least for now) then Soarin, more then Toy Story Mania, more then the Wizarding World of Harry Potter does. This is not the first time some guests have become tired or bored with the classic attraction. However, many still love it. Even when people called it lame, other people still voiced their love for it, as witnessed by this very thread. What will happen when Soarin is called just a screen? What will happen when Toy Story Mania is just considered another attraction? How much magic do they really have, or are they a success because of the hip new temporary wonder of them? All of those mentioned above may very well have the magic we haven't even seen, and last for decades and have "IT." If they do, they'll earn being in the same sentence as that little bird show, which was designed by the single most major person in theme park history. There was a time, Body Wars was the go to, thrill ride at Epcot. We all know what happened to it.
There is a famous oldies song, "Don't know what you've got till it's gone, they paved paradise, and put up a parking lot." There are some that might mention that in relation to a handful of attractions and the replacements of attractions that have surfaced in the parks. That "magic" though, that "it factor" is easily one of the most taken for granted qualities, but also the most difficult to recapture. The whole concept of it is that it is rare or odd that something become that important, and yet for what ever reason, it does. I mentioned Mission Space above, and for all the money Disney threw at it, I'm not certain it's any better for Epcot then Horizons was in the long term. Sure Mission Space probably has more people go through it, but many flat out cannot experience it, as it's a health problem for many. Many, more then I've heard for any other Disney ride (except possibly the teacups), actually do go on the ride and have a bad experience as they get sick on it. Many look to the age of Horizons and see stale and old rides that were in need of being put out of their misery. I saw something else. I saw rides that could be fun, and an experience that the whole family could enjoy together. The whole family cannot go on Mission Space, and that's assuming all would even want to. Horizons may be boring to some, but it wasn't going to make anyone sick or risk any other health concerns. If you didn't like it, then go ride the thrill rides, which are now there thankfully. That's why I find the frustrations in removing attractions and not simply adding more. Dang near every carnival, zoo, and even some malls have carousels now, and I can't honestly remember if I ever went on the Disney World one in my lifetime. That being said, I'm not demanding it get taken out to pasture because it's past it's prime, and something else could go there. It was true the Epcot of the 80s needed thrills, but ripping out old attractions for new can bite Disney, as if the new one doesn't live up to hype, or have a great shelf life, they have two problems. The ride that's currently there, and the ride that was there beforehand, that isn't anymore.
When Looking at The Enchanted Tiki Room, it has a lot of reasons as to why it is significant. Mission Space not so much. Mission Space has the ride technology for it's time and the thrill. Technically Tiki Room has the ride technology for it's time, the original iconic theme song, some entertainment (some like it more then others as that's subjective), and is directly tied to the theme park it's in, Walt Disney himself, and the history of the Disney company. Mission Space was a ridiculously expensive attraction when they built it, but the times caught up to it, and though I'm sure some still undoubtingly like it, I'm not certain Soarin' and Test Track wouldn't beat it for popularity. More and more guests come on here, talking about the 80s and their love for Horizons, I haven't met too many people who have an attachment to Mission Space, for whatever reason.
Ultimately, is Adventureland bad, or negative because of the Tiki Room? It fits the theme of the area, even arguably helping to define the area. If you hate it, then you can simply ignore it. If you've never experienced it, then you should at least give it one shot and and if you hate it, you can spend that time next time waiting in line at Pirates or for a dole whip, or doing anything else you want. If your entire vacation to Disney World is ruined because of an 11 minute show, I don't know what I can say about that. Many people wait in lines for 60+minutes to meet a character. That's not watching a show, that's simply standing in line. Was the waiting in line, or waiting for a parade, or fireworks all that much more entertaining? Most can often walk into Tiki Room, which at Magic Kingdom should be a benefit, as it's reliable and easy to experience. I can see if you waited in line for an hour to experience the Tiki Room how some might be a bit hostile towards the attraction, but I haven't seen anything close to that in years. The show is still longer in duration then many of the rides, so for your wait time moneys worth,it is quite useful and beneficial. If every ride in the park has a 20 minute or more wait time, you are going to have a lot of people losing interest, as some avoid lines like the plague. Tiki Room, Peoplemover, Country Bears and Small World all serve purposes, just like all the countless meet and greets. Unlike other rides, where some debate why a specific ride is in a specific land, or if the ride should exist at all, The Tiki Room fits it's location perfectly, and has earned and deserved the right to be there. Many attractions have not reached that milestone, as I'm sure some would suggest that every attraction can't be saved. The Tiki Room's history should, in my humblest opinion, preserve it.
.
