News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
Disney used to be the best at giving people what they didn’t know they wanted (feature-length animated films, multi-plane animation, a theme park, attractions like Tower of Terror etc.). Now all they do is give the masses what they think they want.

Doing the above is hard. Doing the above consistently is even harder, but it’s what made Disney, Disney. But I guess the risk of continuing that strategy is just too risky for the shareholders.
Excellent point about giving people what they didn't know they wanted.
The best works are created this way.
Some of the worse ones are ones created - and created is too generous a word - to please the masses.
 

Yellow Strap

Well-Known Member
Do something people! Sign the petition below and make your voices heard. It only takes a second and we are just getting started. If you can read this, then you can sign it. Pass it on.

File this next to the Splash Mountain, Great Movie Ride, Streets of America, Maelstrom and Universe of Energy petitions
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
My understanding was the other option was Cars goes where Beyond Big Thunder will eventually be. So we'd keep Rivers of America, get Villains, and get Cars. And that would be it for MK under the current land development paperwork. (I could be wrong.)

I was ready to give up on the parks. Someone had to talk me off the metaphorical ledge.

Fun story: During that ledge moment I made a set of wildly inappropriate smart-axx comments on a group chat with ... individuals ... who, when they calmed me down, said they look forward to the public seeing them when we all release our "stories we'll tell when everyone has retired" stash.

Tons of programming to do today. Back tonight.

That sounds like a much better option for the Magic Kingdom than what they're doing, especially since they need multiple massive expansions to DAK and DHS and really need to spend a bunch of money on EPCOT too.

Magic Kingdom would be fine for decades -- especially since all they had to do was leave a small waterfront. They didn't have to leave all of TSI, or even any of it, really.
 

Yellow Strap

Well-Known Member
You say that, but you're actually wrong -- most people do care about it even if they don't consciously realize it because it's an integral part of the design of a large part of the park.
You're speaking for everyone? Most people don't...sorry. They really don't. They like the aesthetic now, but they really won't care much at all.
The same was said about Splash, Maelstrom, GMR...etc. Money talks.

This will bring in more ticket sales, more LL sales, more capacity, and more merch revenue.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
You're speaking for everyone? Most people don't...sorry. They really don't. They like the aesthetic now, but they really won't care much at all.
The same was said about Splash, Maelstrom, GMR...etc. Money talks.

This will bring in more ticket sales, more LL sales, more capacity, and more merch revenue.

Yes, they absolutely do.

You completely missed the point - go back and re-read my comment. GMR, Maelstrom, and Splash don't make any sense as comparisons because it has nothing to do with attractions; I don't care about Tom Sawyer Island being replaced. It has to do with architecture and design.

They cannot leave Liberty Square and Frontierland as-is now. That may already be in the works, but those areas have to be fundamentally redesigned once this change happens since they are eliminating the waterfront.
 
Last edited:

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
It does. I don't know why.

Knowing what I know about getting execs to make a decision, I suspect it was framed as "Choose A or B" in order to move forward quickly.
Not to go off topic, but one build that would seem to have been granted quickly would’ve been a Moana one (given its strength as an IP) yet that fell by the wayside. Knowing that the purse was opened for general buildouts now, is there a sense Moana was kept in the back pocket since that’s an easier sell even during more tight budgetary times?
 

Yellow Strap

Well-Known Member
It does. I don't know why.

Knowing what I know about getting execs to make a decision, I suspect it was framed as "Choose A or B" in order to move forward quickly.
Len,
Do you think the ability to use land already set for the park and not have to spend more to get unused ready for expansion was a major factor?

Could that money saved have helped us get Monstropolis greenlit now and/or Tropical Americas built faster on a 2 1/2 timeline?
 

Wall-e

Well-Known Member
They

They don't do this anymore.
They do the Riviera and Polynesian DVC.
That's the problem.
Maybe but at least in the case of the Poly Tower the concept art looks to be in line with the finished product. The point I’d like to make is that if WDI is given the resources to see this concept to it’s full conclusion then what we could be left with is an entire land/area that matches the atmosphere of WL. IF that happens this would absolutely deliver on atmosphere, kinetic energy and ambience.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
By your reasoning, they shouldn't do any Princess stuff because the target demo for that is 4-7 year old girls.
I'm not sure where you get that from. First off, the princess are far more relevant to a large range of girls. And they're also an iconic part of Disney in general. But if you read what I said, cars could absolutely become a classic ride. It's going to end up how great of a ride it turns out to be. Splash wasn't a great ride because of it's source material. I didn't say they shouldn't do a Cars ride. Is there better ips to put in the magic kingdom? Yea, I'd say so.
 

Yellow Strap

Well-Known Member
Yes, they absolutely do.

You completely missed the point - go back and re-read my comment. GMR, Maelstrom, and Splash don't make any sense as comparisons because it has nothing to do with attractions. It has to do with architecture and design.

They cannot leave Liberty Square and Frontierland as-is now. That may already be in the works, but those areas have to be fundamentally redesigned once this change happens since they are eliminating the waterfront.
Outside of the bubble...they don't sorry. Its a hard reality, but true.
 

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
Maybe but at least in the case of the Poly Tower the concept art looks to be in line with the finished product. The point I’d like to make is that if WDI is given the resources to see this concept to it’s full conclusion then what we could be left with is an entire land/area that matches the atmosphere of WL. IF that happens this would absolutely deliver on atmosphere, kinetic energy and ambience.
Well, why shouldn't a cut rate barely themed tower look like the concept art?
Yeah, they can deliver on that.
Think they'd ever build a Yacht/Beachclub, Boardwalk, Animal Kingdom Lodge again?
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Outside of the bubble...they don't sorry. Its a hard reality, but true.

But they do. There's plenty of evidence to back that up.

You're looking at this as a Disney World fan thing, but that's not the point at all. It has absolutely nothing to do with Disney World specifically; it applies to all designed space. This instance of it just happens to be at Disney World.
 

lentesta

Premium Member
Len,
Do you think the ability to use land already set for the park and not have to spend more to get unused ready for expansion was a major factor?

Could that money saved have helped us get Monstropolis greenlit now and/or Tropical Americas built faster on a 2 1/2 timeline?

Hypothetically, I can imagine that ... stockholders ... are asking ... publicly and privately ... why the parks attractions pipeline was allowed to go empty. Hypothetically. Because tf do I know?

So if you're an exec, that starts a ticking clock that you need to address.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom