News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

Carnotaurus Understudy

Carnotaurus Understudy

Active Member
Dear Prudence said:
Though with Huckleberry Finn's novel, there is no uniform consensus. BIG RIVER is getting a movie musical adaptation, the novel JAMES has been met with acclaim, and even African American literary scholars widely disagree. It's not my place to comment on that as a Non Black person, but I think it's worth noting that it's just not that simple or easy. It's where nuance and empathy is so important.

The only thing people remember about Tom Sawyer is the white washed fence and them running away to an island to be pirates. Without doxxing myself, I say this as someone who spent a childhood with other children mocking me asking if my biological father was "Injun Joe." (Aren't kids GREAT?! ROFL).

I think dialogue is great. I think nuance and empathy are great.

I also know that none of this is being done for my benefit. It's not done with guests like me in mind. It's done to sell Cars merch.
Click to expand...

Very well-said, thank you. In my opinion, Frontierland is such an interesting, complex, and valuable piece of Americana because it reflects the tension between romantic Western fantasies and the not-so-pleasant reality. It is fascinating to read how, for example, the narration on Disneyland's Mark Twain riverboat has evolved over the years (I am not sure about script changes to the Liberty Belle, and Google isn't helping...).

I do not believe that modern Disney is interested in continuing to engage with the art they have created, though.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
lentesta said:
Sorry for the crude graphic.

Here's a chart showing the average ratings and 95% confidence interval, by age group, for the attractions we're discussing, from the Unofficial Guide/TouringPlans.com reader surveys.

View attachment 808942

These are the age groups we survey:
  • Pre-school children (up to age 5)
  • Grade school children (ages 6-12)
  • Teens (ages 13-19)
  • Young Adults (ages 20-30)
  • Over 30's (ages 30-64)
  • Seniors (ages 65+)
The horizontal line is the average rating for that attraction for that age group.
The vertical line is the 95% confidence interval for that age group.

A decent rule of thumb is that if the confidence intervals don't overlap, the result you're seeing is probably due to some underlying truth, and not (for example) random chance/noise in the sample/etc.

It's a 5-point scale, with 1 bad and 5 excellent. (Take that, DEFCON.)

Radiator Springs Racers is on the left in mint green.
Tom Sawyer Island is next in salmon pink.
The Liberty Square Riverboat is in baby blue.
Hall of Presidents is in lemonade yellow on the right.

Every age group except pre-schoolers rates Radiator Springs Racers substantially higher than any of the other attractions.

It's not close.

Teens prefer Radiator Springs by almost 1.4 points over the next-closest attraction in a 5-point scale.
Young Adults prefer Radiator Springs by almost 1.2 points.
Over 30's prefer Radiator Springs by almost a full point.
Seniors prefer Radiator Springs by almost half a point.

If you want the parks to make people happy, Cars is likely to do that way more than anything that's there now.
Click to expand...
You keep trying to silo this and I don’t understand why. A new Cars attraction isn’t going to be rated worse if the Riverboat or Hall of Presidents still exists.

People’s overall assessment of the day may be worse though as a result of poor design.
 
Pi on my Cake

Pi on my Cake

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
doctornick said:
I don’t think we know for sure, but to me the tea leaves suggest because they wanted to remove RoA and TSI because they were viewed as “problematic”.

The key thing is they decided to remove RoA/TSI first and use that location, then decided on an IP. And they didn’t choose it because it was cost effective
Click to expand...
The only real problematic thing about TSI is how inaccessible it was and how far behind modern safety standards it was

Honestly I think the Island has been doomed for a while purely because of how inaccessible the paths are. I don't think there's a single square foot of sidewalk on that island that is up to ADA standards or capable if handling more than the couple dozen guests the island gets in a day. And generally if one part of something gets updates beyond basic maintenence, then the whole thing needs to be re-inspected and brought up to modern codes for accessibility and for safety.

If I'm right (which admittedly I could be off) then Disney was likely faced with the choice of either entirely redo the island, let it rot taking up half that side of the park and remaining a lawsuit waiting to happen (I've literally found a rusty hatchet in the fort before sitting on a bench), or tear it out and give us an entire new land plus easy access to 2-3 HUGE land sized expansion pads. Tom Sawyer was never long for the world in its current form

I'm just happy the Cars area, despite being Cars, seems focused on exploring a peaceful natural environment full of rock work and water features.
 
splah

splah

Well-Known Member
the other thing that grinds my gears (pun intended this time) is just the scale of things these days. this new ride is going to massive. everything is huge and spread out. i would love it if disney gave us a classic darkride scale. you can get the illusion of speed by having things closer to you.

would we be losing our marbles if cars was brought in at a physically smaller scale?

also, also enough with the mini lands. i'm over them
 
JustInTime

JustInTime

Well-Known Member
lentesta said:
Ha! Not my intent. But what's left in Liberty Square after Cars and Haunted Mansion becoming the entrance to Villains? Just HOP.
Click to expand...
It looks like Liberty Tree (and the buildings around it) is removed in the concept art. Have you heard anything about this? Watch everything from Harbor House over become Haunted Mansion themed…
 
Last edited:
Dear Prudence

Dear Prudence

Well-Known Member
Carnotaurus Understudy said:
Very well-said, thank you. In my opinion, Frontierland is such an interesting, complex, and valuable piece of Americana because it reflects the tension between romantic Western fantasies and the not-so-pleasant reality. It is fascinating to read how, for example, the narration on Disneyland's Mark Twain riverboat has evolved over the years (I am not sure about script changes to the Liberty Belle, and Google isn't helping...).

I do not believe that modern Disney is interested in continuing to engage with the art they have created, though.
Click to expand...
Thank you. And you are absolutely right, modern Disney would NEVER.

Exactly! The Mark Twain dialog changed and evolved. It's okay. And even even good for stuff TO change.

Walt hired Native people for Disneyland regularly. He invited the Nations of the Grand Canyon and their spiritual leaders to bless the Grand Canyon diorama. If it's inaccurate, fix that. He wasn't perfect and a lot of the media during his lifetime was problematic, but he still always showed respect for actual people. They hire cultural ambassadors for Epcot. Native Nations are sovereign domestic dependent nations, they could hire them the same way.
 
C

CoasterCowboy67

Active Member
Though I think it’s a beautiful design feature and will miss it, I’m not nostalgically wedded to ROA / TSI. I just don’t get why it’s being removed to add 2 more attractions to a park that has almost 3x as many as HS and AK to begin with.

The capacity argument feels naïve. You’ll have more people at MK spread over more rides (same queue times), but even less ability to feel like you experienced the park on your 1 trip every so often

The variety argument feels like a 1st world problem compared to HS and AK. Why are we solving for variety at MK when the others can’t even fill one day?

I would’ve made Villains the special thing that MK got, 2 net new attractions, and give HS and AK more net new attractions given they’re only getting replacements (TBD on what if anything Monsters is replacing)
 
B

basas

Well-Known Member
Dear Prudence said:
Thank you. And you are absolutely right, modern Disney would NEVER.

Exactly! The Mark Twain dialog changed and evolved. It's okay. And even even good for stuff TO change.

Walt hired Native people for Disneyland regularly. He invited the Nations of the Grand Canyon and their spiritual leaders to bless the Grand Canyon diorama. If it's inaccurate, fix that. He wasn't perfect and a lot of the media during his lifetime was problematic, but he still always showed respect for actual people. They hire cultural ambassadors for Epcot. Native Nations are sovereign domestic dependent nations, they could hire them the same way.
Click to expand...

Evolving is okay. Gutting and erasing…not okay. They’re doing the second…
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
lentesta said:
Sorry for the crude graphic.

Here's a chart showing the average ratings and 95% confidence interval, by age group, for the attractions we're discussing, from the Unofficial Guide/TouringPlans.com reader surveys.

View attachment 808942

These are the age groups we survey:
  • Pre-school children (up to age 5)
  • Grade school children (ages 6-12)
  • Teens (ages 13-19)
  • Young Adults (ages 20-30)
  • Over 30's (ages 30-64)
  • Seniors (ages 65+)
The horizontal line is the average rating for that attraction for that age group.
The vertical line is the 95% confidence interval for that age group.

A decent rule of thumb is that if the confidence intervals don't overlap, the result you're seeing is probably due to some underlying truth, and not (for example) random chance/noise in the sample/etc.

It's a 5-point scale, with 1 bad and 5 excellent. (Take that, DEFCON.)

Radiator Springs Racers is on the left in mint green.
Tom Sawyer Island is next in salmon pink.
The Liberty Square Riverboat is in baby blue.
Hall of Presidents is in lemonade yellow on the right.

Every age group except pre-schoolers rates Radiator Springs Racers substantially higher than any of the other attractions.

It's not close.

Teens prefer Radiator Springs by almost 1.4 points over the next-closest attraction in a 5-point scale.
Young Adults prefer Radiator Springs by almost 1.2 points.
Over 30's prefer Radiator Springs by almost a full point.
Seniors prefer Radiator Springs by almost half a point.

If you want the parks to make people happy, Cars is likely to do that way more than anything that's there now.
Click to expand...

I feel like this misses the point. Nothing you're saying here is wrong, but it's just kind of, well, irrelevant.

First of all, we aren't getting Radiator Springs Racers -- the new attraction is an unknown (although I'd be very surprised if it isn't pretty good at worst).

Second, there is room/options to build the Cars attraction without demolishing the existing area. That's the main issue. It's not an either/or proposition; Disney could have kept them all.

Personally, I don't have a major problem with eliminating TSI, just like I wouldn't have a major problem eliminating Jungle Cruise for something that better utilizes all that space. My main issue is with eliminating the waterfront, as that essentially requires a massive overhaul of the existing Liberty Square and Frontierland. They won't work as designed without the river there, but who knows if/when Disney will get around to fixing the new problem they're creating.
 
Last edited:
B

basas

Well-Known Member
lentesta said:
Sorry for the crude graphic.

Here's a chart showing the average ratings and 95% confidence interval, by age group, for the attractions we're discussing, from the Unofficial Guide/TouringPlans.com reader surveys.

View attachment 808942

These are the age groups we survey:
  • Pre-school children (up to age 5)
  • Grade school children (ages 6-12)
  • Teens (ages 13-19)
  • Young Adults (ages 20-30)
  • Over 30's (ages 30-64)
  • Seniors (ages 65+)
The horizontal line is the average rating for that attraction for that age group.
The vertical line is the 95% confidence interval for that age group.

A decent rule of thumb is that if the confidence intervals don't overlap, the result you're seeing is probably due to some underlying truth, and not (for example) random chance/noise in the sample/etc.

It's a 5-point scale, with 1 bad and 5 excellent. (Take that, DEFCON.)

Radiator Springs Racers is on the left in mint green.
Tom Sawyer Island is next in salmon pink.
The Liberty Square Riverboat is in baby blue.
Hall of Presidents is in lemonade yellow on the right.

Every age group except pre-schoolers rates Radiator Springs Racers substantially higher than any of the other attractions.

It's not close.

Teens prefer Radiator Springs by almost 1.4 points over the next-closest attraction in a 5-point scale.
Young Adults prefer Radiator Springs by almost 1.2 points.
Over 30's prefer Radiator Springs by almost a full point.
Seniors prefer Radiator Springs by almost half a point.

If you want the parks to make people happy, Cars is likely to do that way more than anything that's there now.
Click to expand...

If every attraction achieved perfect score, your grading wouldn’t work. Not every attraction can be the most popular ride in the park. Not every attraction can be a headliner. As mentioned, this particular decision didn’t need to be an either/or.
 
zachrupertdsn

zachrupertdsn

Well-Known Member
Grading John Deere GIF by JC Property Professionals


Can't wait!
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
I have a bigger problem eliminating the waterfront that essentially requires a massive overhaul of the existing Liberty Square and Frontierland; they won't work as designed without the river there.
Click to expand...
For awhile now Disney has claimed to be doing these grand reimaginings but they’ve never really committed. If you truly believe that Frontierland needs a radical rethink then actually do it and redesign the whole thing around your new central idea. The new attraction though looks inward towards itself because the incongruity is known and will be reflected in the final experience.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
For awhile now Disney has claimed to be doing these grand reimaginings but they’ve never really committed. If you truly believe that Frontierland needs a radical rethink then actually do it and redesign the whole thing around your new central idea. The new attraction though looks inward towards itself because the incongruity is known and will be reflected in the final experience.
Click to expand...

New Fantasyland, for all its faults, is probably the last time a reimagining actually felt complete. There weren't really any holes or empty/underutilized spaces left there.

Tomorrowland never really got off the ground, and what they did do was left half-done in pieces. EPCOT turned into a bit of a disaster.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom