News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[danlb_2000]

that is patently false. People do care about it. Disney has land... They can build this attraction in any of the other parks that need the capacity WAY more then the Magic Kingdom does...They can also expand the footprint of the park and build this where it does NOT completely change the atmosphere and iconic layout of the flagship Disney Castle Park. THere is no going back once this is done...

Even if you don't go on the Riverboat or Tom Sawyer Island, this area still impacts your park experience whether the guest consciously knows it or not.

 

[Jrb1979]

Disney's doing what it thinks will maximize the money it makes for shareholders over the next 5-ish years.

To your point, there are other ways of approaching these kinds of decisions. And as I said upthread, those discussions are really about what flavor of capitalism you prefer.

I get what you're saying. Attractions to them now isn't about making the parks better but how much ROI they can get New attractions is all about the LL money.

 

[doctornick]

Even if you don't go on the Riverboat or Tom Sawyer Island, this area still impacts your park experience whether the guest consciously knows it or not.

That is the thing. My big gripe isn't losing the riverboat ride or TSI per se but that the atmosphere will be absolutely ruined by this. I would imagine the cars area will look nice enough on its own but having physical land abutting what was designed as waterfront in LS and Frontierland will make those areas seem extremely awkward. Unless they are planning to add new buildings along what is currently the waterfront (which would just add to the expense), the whole thing will be off putting.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I really think this is a mistake personally. But, regardless, some interesting numbers. I did some quick rough measurements off Google maps. Here are some comparisons to DCA locations. I think scale is going to be a bigger issue than people realize.

This new area (basically from the river in) compares to DCA as follows:
-The new area is approximately 40% the size of Cars Land
-The new area is approximately 75% the size of RSR itself (no other parts of CarsLand)
-The new area is approximately 75% of the size of Grizzly River Run (just the ride - not any area around it).
-The new area is about 35% of the Condor Flats/Grizzly Peak area.

I think GRR is the best comparison, because it is in the middle of the park. That is a great ride, but it's not a huge area. Let alone adding in a second smaller attraction. I don't think this has the scale or grandeur a lot of people think it will.

 

[the_rich]

@lentesta can you elaborate as to what the other option was?

 

[Incomudro]

I feel this way of thinking about the parks antithetical to what made Disney parks different from their competitors. Based on reading the numbers this way, you could justify all sorts of weird things like sticking a roller coaster in the middle of World Showcase lagoon because the Friendships don't rate as highly on guest surveys as Cosmic Rewind.

For years, they've been producing glossy books and documentaries explaining how much thought went into colours, sightlines, transitions, research, etc. to suggest that it was this kind of attention to detail that actually made people happier in Disney parks than those of their competitors.

I find it so strange to just say to hell with all that, surveys show people prefer rides. I even don't understand being that enthused about the possibilities it opens up for the future. With this kind of management and Imagineering, we'll have the Incredibles building a training camp at the foot of Big Thunder.

For sure.
Great art and great things be they paintings, music, movies, food etc., isn't designed, isn't great - just because they sell.
McDonald's sells billions of hamburgers but it is not a great culinary experience in food nor ambience.
Many a pop music princess sells millions of downloads of generic, soulless dreck.
Paving over my local farm and erecting a strip mall brings in so much more money.
But is any of this good?

 

[Incomudro]

I have no desire to take my family back to what WDW has become.

I've largely lost it.
I doubt I'll go back until my son's have children of their own and my wife and I go with them.

 

[Jrb1979]

This is an area of the park that no one cares about except a few online die hards. Disneys job is to make money. That’s it. Nothing else. This will make them more money than the existing, dead land that no one cares about. Again, no one cared about this part of the park until yesterday, now all of the sudden it’s the greatest thing in world history and should always be saved regardless of the fact that that the real customers dont care about it.

It's not about Cars coming to the park. I'm all for it. I feel even if only a handful of people used TSI or Rivers, it was something that kept people out of other lines. Not everything needs to be an E ticket.

From the way many are talking a lot you don't do Dumbo, Mickey's Philarmagic, Carousel of Progress or Laugh Floor. It sounds like all anyone rides is just E tickets.

 

[flyerjab]

I've been on the forums now since Test Track 2.0 photos started surfacing. That was during the heyday of @WDW1974. This expansion brings me back to a point he made one time. In fact, it was one of the last bold predictions/statements he made. He said that all usable space within the MK was going to be utilized. That it was going to be filled up with rides, stores, restaurants, etc. It gave me the impression that all breathable space was going to disappear…very much like the impression this project is giving. I wonder if this is part of what he was forecasting?

 

[Lou Filerman]

that is patently false. People do care about it. Disney has land... They can build this attraction in any of the other parks that need the capacity WAY more then the Magic Kingdom does...They can also expand the footprint of the park and build this where it does NOT completely change the atmosphere and iconic layout of the flagship Disney Castle Park. THere is no going back once this is done...

I should rephrase. The VAST majority of the general public doesn’t care. When this thing opens it will be a monster hit. The lines will be massive and the ILL will sell out in seconds. That’s the people Disney cares about pleasing. A few hundred die hards who all say they aren’t going anymore anyway do not play in disneys plans. I agree it could go in another park and possibly fit better but again, when it opens and it’s a huge money maker Disney will get what they want, a new money making machine and getting rid of an absolutely boring part of the park that was generating zero dollars.

 

[Bocabear]

It is extremely distressing... and if they are willing to spend all of this money on site prep, why not expand outward without ruining this section of the park....for an IP that doesn't fit...especially when DHS NEEDS more capacity. This is going to be a smaller version of a Cars Land...way smaller than the DCA version, without the beautiful and recognizable location of Radiator Springs... So it will be a non-descript rugged mountain landscape... This is a terrible idea for The Magic Kingdom...

 

[DW Aficionado]

I was all for repurposing Tom Sawyer island, but I never imagined removing the Rivers of America and just filling it a Cars ride in Frontierland

 

[DisneyFan18]

I think the main issue is the fact that it’s hard to imagine how this land will look like once the river is gone because we are used to it being there.

Maybe the Cars area will be very pretty and enhance Frontierland, maybe it will be atrocious, none of us can know for sure because we are talking about something that doesn’t exist and that hasn’t existed yet. The only thing we DO know is that it will be different and that it will take time to get used to it once it opens regardless of how you feel about the final product because part of your mind will still be thinking about how it looked before.

Nonetheless, I do think that some of you are being hyperbolic. It’s okay to feel disappointed and wish they had gone on a different direction. It’s also okay to be ready to embrace change and accept the inevitable. But when it gets to name calling and such, it’s a little ridiculous…

 

[lentesta]

I feel this way of thinking about the parks antithetical to what made Disney parks different from their competitors. Based on reading the numbers this way, you could justify all sorts of weird things like sticking a roller coaster in the middle of World Showcase lagoon because the Friendships don't rate as highly on guest surveys as Cosmic Rewind.

For years, they've been producing glossy books and documentaries explaining how much thought went into colours, sightlines, transitions, research, etc. to suggest that it was this kind of attention to detail that actually made people happier in Disney parks than those of their competitors.

I find it so strange to just say to hell with all that, surveys show people prefer rides. I even don't understand being that enthused about the possibilities it opens up for the future. With this kind of management and Imagineering, we'll have the Incredibles building a training camp at the foot of Big Thunder.

All valid points.

I keep saying this, but keep in mind that Disney's goal is to maximize the amount of money guests give to shareholders.

So if you're an executive, it's a safer bet for shareholders and your career to say to Wall Street "We're replacing a set of old, not-highly-rated attractions that don't generate Lightning Lane revenue with a new set of family-friendly rides based on IP that's earned us $22 billion so far and for which we can charge $20 per person more to skip the lines."

That's it. That's how the parks work. Everything else is marketing.

As you've said (and I agree) this approach has its limits. For one thing, it's almost impossible for this method to build anything like the original Disneyland or EPCOT. There are far too many unknowns for shareholders, and it'd never get past the board. The same is true for out-of-the-box projects like the Galactic Starcruiser (RIP).

As I've also said, if you don't like the idea of shareholders über alles, you're saying you prefer a different flavor of capitalism. Which is also cool. It's just not what we have here.

 

[Incomudro]

beyond all the million and two reasons there are for not making this irreversible misstep with the park, they also said they are leaving Radiator Springs behind and heading west to new locations... Sounds a lot like the Star Wars Land... A new unrecognizable location that was never in a film and a place no one cares about... This really is a terrible idea... So the internal waterway of the park will be gone forever... This really is the worst idea ever....Cars doesn't even belong in the Magic Kingdom....It should be built in DHS where it would fit nicely...

Yes, while I think the ride itself looks like fun and the thematic elements will look good as they inevitably do.
This reminds me of Tiana's.
A story that takes place outside of the story.
I love the way Cars Land in California looks - even though I've never been there - because of what it recreates from the film.
My sons's would have gone bananas if that land existed when they were little boys.
Looks like they'll at least include an AA McQueen and Mater to remind people what this is based on.

 

[lazyboy97o]

One of the truly bizarre dynamics of attraction closures in the Disney fan community is the glee that comes out not regarding something new but others losing something they appreciate and enjoy. It’s like there is some sort of resentment that people enjoy something they do not, especially if it is not a marquee experience, as though it’s some sort of undue deference. A weird jealously that those people are undeserving but being given special treatment and now the undeserving are being out in their place.

 

[Bocabear]

Yes, while I think the ride itself looks like fun and the thematic elements will look good as they inevitably do.
This reminds me of Tiana's.
A story that takes place outside of the story.
I love the way Cars Land in California looks - even though I've never been there because of what it recreates from the film.
My sons's would have gone bananas if that land existed when they were little boys.
Looks like they'll at least include an AA McQueen and Mater to remind people what this is based on.

I wonder if the AA characters will be completely off-model like Tiana is... Like Mater will now be a Chevy Bronco instead of a tow truck and will own and operate an oil refinery and scrap metal yard...

 

[Incomudro]

I wonder if the AA characters will be completely off-model like Tiana is... Like Mater will now be a Chevy Bronco instead of a tow truck and will own and M

Mater will be all new Electric Mater!
Who needs that hydrocarbon spewing bucket of rust anyway!
Old things have no charm!
Progress!

 

[bwr827]

The bear wasn't on the island. I'm not sure what you're referring to with a machete.

It was a Danny Trejo meet and greet. Trejo is secretly a huge Disney guy.

 

[Disney Glimpses]

Just so we're al clear: if the leadership at Disney is willing to do this, they are willing to do much, much more.

At risk of sounding ultra-dramatic, it truly is over. And I don't mean that these parks can't be enjoyed by families (they will be). Nor do I mean that every historic aspect of these parks will be gone overnight.

What I mean is that today's dopamine addicted society has convinced Disney that the historic values and ideas that were the bedrock of these parks are no longer important or valuable. I don't know how long it will be but one day, every last facet of these ideas will be gone and Walt Disney World will be indistinguishable from Universal Orlando. My guess is about 20 years left before it's all gone.