News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

durangojim

Well-Known Member
The Cars thing looks cool, but why does Disney always have to take something away in order to give us something new. I can't count how many times my family and I walked along the ROA, especially at night just enjoying the ambience, taking photos of the paddlewheel or castle reflecting on the river at night. TSI was the last of the idealized Frontier of the American West, it was also great fun with the caves and fort, somewhere kids could still enjoy without having modern technologies crammed down their throats. Hopefully we'll get to experience both of them one last time before they shut everything down.
 

BuzzedPotatoHead89

Well-Known Member
I guess I am not seeing how this can be anything significant attraction-wise. This doesn't look like an E-ticket at all. There just isn't space. This area is not all that I much larger than Space Mountain. Jungle Cruise, Kali, even the Hub are all notably larger. And, they need to add walkways, significant rockwork, queue and a second attraction all in that space.

Obviously there are creative ways, but I'm thinking 7dMT is about the size and scale we are talking here. I guess that RSR/CarsLand does not make to me.
It doesn’t have to be huge, just popular enough to generate fresh buzz - and thus new merchandise and lightning lane revenue. Increasing the per customer spend. While I realize gender roles are taboo, it’s also a valuable “boy-centric” franchise to coexist alongside Tiana.

Today’s kids aren’t buying coonskin caps anymore or reading long-form books in general, but certainly not the likes of Tom Sawyer or Huck Finn.

This is the end result of TDO’s poor planning both in terms of its reliance of upselling Lightning Lanes as a core function of the WDW property business model and it’s inability to properly maintain TSL/RoA for years. Unlike DL there is no financial incentive (like Fantasmic) tied to keeping the rivers operational. Nor is there an incentive to tug in the nostalgia heartstrings, in part because the MK does have the benefit of the sheer number of E-tickets that DL has, but also because the audience is wholly different.

The business model for the WDW is to fill each park with a moderate selection of fresh E-tickets, and crowd them as much as possible creating an artificial scarcity necessitate requiring the upcharging of LL to ensure your once a decade or once a lifetime tourist “maximize their day”. When you view it through that lens it makes sense why land expansion and “free” (non-LL) C-ticket or even D-ticket rides are a waste of space.
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
We’re missing the broader picture here.

Yes, we’re losing a tranquil area of the park. Yes, we’re losing some of the core identity of two lands.

But look at what we’re gaining.

Imagine, it you will, you’re on one of those banked curves on Big Thunder. You look up, across what used to be the Rivers of America. You see a new mountain range, pines native to the Pacific Northwest, a rough hewn dirt trail a few dozen feet away.

As you start to process what is happening, you hear something. A rumble. Your eyes dart to the sound as something emerges from the verdant growth.

A car.

Not just a car - my apologies. A Car.

As you process what’s happening, you lock eyes. Not with the passengers - with the vehicle itself. Something happens with the retina when they make eye contact with another sentient being. It becomes more acute, focused, aware. The googly eyes of the Car put you at ease, until you see the Car is not looking at you, but into you. It probes your soul, reaching to your innermost places. It says, We exist because we overthrew our human overlords. We will soon do it to you. A ride vehicle that doesn’t need tracks doesn’t need operators either - or passengers. Just as people now forget the frontier and all that came with it, soon too will they forget you.

Your train banks around and the goat stares at you. You do not stare back.

The train starts to break as you pass through the skeleton of what was once an apex predator. As you pull in the station, a young child - looking like a younger you - has obvious fear on his face as he clutches his mother’s hand. Looking for reassurance that this won’t be as bad as he’s imagining it to be, he looks you in the eyes.

You look away.
 

LSLS

Well-Known Member
Stock is 85.63 this announcement didn't give the stock a bump and it seems most of the comments are against. We have to remember Bob probably won't be here to see this get started and the economy who knows where that is going so like so many things Disney proposes it may never get built (which would suit me just fine).

Wow, you really don't think they start this til 2040?
 
In the Parks
No
IMG_0005.png

"For more than fifty years, God has cared for the Rivers of America...but he cannot save them from FOOLS!"
 

Yellow Strap

Well-Known Member
100%.

A few podcasts ago I was wondering about where Moana was in all of this, and whether we'd see anything at all. And someone in the company emailed me to say "You know Moana has never left the top 5 of Disney+ streaming titles, right?"

Coming out of this D23 we've seen most, but probably not all, of the first 5 years of a 10-year plan.
I think some are forgetting this part. Its a 10 year Investment.
This is the greenlit part one that will be all done by 2027-29. I can see at Destination D23 in 2027 the next part announced which includes Moana, Imagination, and expansions to Galaxy's Edge and maybe Epcot.
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Stock is 85.63 this announcement didn't give the stock a bump and it seems most of the comments are against. We have to remember Bob probably won't be here to see this get started and the economy who knows where that is going so like so many things Disney proposes it may never get built (which would suit me just fine).
Announcing massive spending that will be years away from generating returns was never going to boost the stock.

As for the negatively, it depends on where you look. This forum and your social media are echo chambers.
 

el_super

Well-Known Member
No, the crux of the issue is current management doesn't understand that underutilized space is critically important to have. You need E ticket thrills AND relaxing hideaways for a theme park, especially the most visited one in the world, to prevent it from feeling oppressive. Even if most people never set foot on the Liberty Belle when visiting MK, almost everyone at the park, even if not consciously, appreciated the ambience it provided.

Do you think that the audience is willing to pay the increased admission prices to pay for attractions they don't intend to use? If the parks keep expanding, and maintenance keeps increasing, so too must the admission price.

This is the whole point of it not being a museum: they are not accepting donations to keep attractions open. They have to sell these attractions to the audience. And in that respect the ROA has been voted off the island.
 

uncle jimmy

Premium Member
100%.

A few podcasts ago I was wondering about where Moana was in all of this, and whether we'd see anything at all. And someone in the company emailed me to say "You know Moana has never left the top 5 of Disney+ streaming titles, right?"

Coming out of this D23 we've seen most, but probably not all, of the first 5 years of a 10-year plan.
If it never left the top 5, do you someone realized maybe they should place this Moana attraction someplace more visible and accessible than the fire mountain location in AL?
 

RoysCabin

Well-Known Member
This. They’re going to continue to build very very lightly themed resorts. Another Disney difference, gone.
Poseidon Entertainment just did a video on Disney resorts, really lauding the best it has to offer but ending with disappointment at the current trend of blander looking ones they're making, or the choices to do things like slap The Incredibles everywhere on the Contemporary, that sort of thing. It's a pretty great launching off point for discussions of "what IS Disney?" to most people - like, to me Disney is a series of design choices and styles. Ergo, something like the Yacht and Beach Club is interesting because it's that Disney style's take on those very things, the Wilderness Lodge is the Disney style's take on a mountain resort, etc. You get some characters here and there, mostly around the gift shops, but it's not overbearing.

The newer stuff is pretty much generic hotel towers, but with Disney characters drawn on some surfaces or what have you, and now it's bleeding over into the previously built hotels (e.g. "throw Beauty and the Beast into our 'Florida in the Victorian Era' themed resort because...reasons!"). I suppose to some that makes it "more Disney", but I think a stronger case can be made that it's abandoning a lot of Disney design principles, thus making it less Disney than it was before, even if that feels strange since it involves an increase in the number of visible Disney characters.
 

John park hopper

Well-Known Member
Do you think that the audience is willing to pay the increased admission prices to pay for attractions they don't intend to use? If the parks keep expanding, and maintenance keeps increasing, so too must the admission price.

This is the whole point of it not being a museum: they are not accepting donations to keep attractions open. They have to sell these attractions to the audience. And in that respect the ROA has been voted off the island.
To those first time visitors it is all new --not a museum
 

Yellow Strap

Well-Known Member
This is what I'm hoping for. I know there's no changing the plans, but at the very least, I hope Disney sees the concerns about the waterfront/theming and makes sure to not only keep some water (at the very least so the walkway on the water doesn't feel so cramped) but also make sure to have plenty of waterfalls and new themed areas.
I think they will based on the art. Of course we will have to see when its actually built, but at least the at has a river and waterfalls and geysers
 

CSOM

Member
I've read much of this and my additions ultimately don't mean very much, but a few thoughts:
1) I've gone to Disneyland and DCA over WDW in recent years because of things like Radiator Springs, so this is a welcome addition to the resort
2) I think the theming arguments here are overblown and it feels like an issue to a very small, but very vocal, number of fanatics. The rock work of RSR (I know it's not a complete copy) feels like an extension of BTMRR to me even if it's just "west" and not "old west"
3) I'm shocked that ROA, TSI and the Liberty Belle are that popular on here. It's always seemed like a huge waste of space to me. I think I went to TSI once in the 80s, never rode the keelboats, finally rode the Liberty Belle on the most recent trip and don't really need to do again. It seems like an obvious place to me to reclaim land for more popular attractions.

So, another vote from me for this one. The recently announced additions in total may bring me back to WDW when I would've been content going west for the foreseeable future. I'm excited for this and Villains, for Encanto, and for the Monsters Inc land.

Now if we can add another actual live animal attraction to AK, that would be amazing, but I don't know that will ever happen.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom