News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[TrainsOfDisney]

It is going to pain people to hear this but just know…………..there are expansion pads at each of these parks that you will not live to see put in use.

That’s only painful since they are ignoring those and using this! Haha

 

[Charlie The Chatbox Ghost]

This is it. I don’t really care about the IP vs Original arguments, and I do feel bad for people sad to lose TSI and RoA. What bothers me is the moral superiority this thread has taken — arguments that fans don’t know what they want, that Disney hates the RoA or hates America, that the Imagineers are malicious, that closing a project is a personal offense to Walt or Jim Henson or whomever, or that dedicated fans deserve more say than whatever the general public wants.

And then it turns out, they were wrong. At the end of the day, they’ll eat up the same slop as the general public.

It’s interesting that you frame the “moral superiority” of people who aren’t happy with the loss of RoA/TSI as being upset purely because of politics/Walts beliefs or hatred against Imagineers. Most people in this thread and on Twitter have been expressing that they’re majorly upset with the loss of the atmosphere- the “park” part of “theme park”. We don’t hate Imagineers, they are told what to do by corporate, they don’t have a say in what stays or goes. I’ve already talked about why dozens of times. The people screaming “Woke Disney hates America” are a small minority of fans who are just screaming to fuel the culture war. They don’t represent the fandom as a whole, like how the Save Splash crowd don’t represent everyone who liked Splash.

Also you call the parks “slop” at the end there- so you’re agreeing this Cars situation is not great?

 

[Chi84]

This is it. I don’t really care about the IP vs Original arguments, and I do feel bad for people sad to lose TSI and RoA. What bothers me is the moral superiority this thread has taken — arguments that fans don’t know what they want, that Disney hates the RoA or hates America, that the Imagineers are malicious, that closing a project is a personal offense to Walt or Jim Henson or whomever, or that dedicated fans deserve more say than whatever the general public wants.

And then it turns out, they were wrong. At the end of the day, they’ll eat up the same slop as the general public.

There are many Disney fans here, especially the older ones, who are very nostalgic about the original parks and are having an understandably difficult time with all these changes.

When people are that passionate about something they tend to get upset and say the kind of things you quoted.

It’ll die down as it always does. Change is hard.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Disney theme parks are holistic experiences. They represent the sum of their parts, and are not judged only for a handful of aspects. Everything that engages your senses over the course of your visit contributes to your enjoyment. Not just rides, shows or food, but everything in between that you come into contact with or glance from a distance. Even the things you don't see or are unaware of impact your visit, because they occupy someone else's time and energy.

Disney has spent decades whittling down their theme parks into a set number of activities, based on metrics and averages. They then took that data and built entire theme parks based on it, only to find out they were unsuccessful. Disney has spent billions trying to correct their own mistakes because it turns out theme parks can't be measured merely by the numerical sum of what can be seen. 7.4 attractions in a day is meaningless if the environments they're placed in, the burdens and expenses guests must endure to see them, or operations are all lackluster. Worse still if you're a customer who cannot visit all those 7.4 attractions because of physical limitations or a lack of interest.

Walt Disney Studios Park was a park with nothing but IP. Had more than 7.4 attractions, some of which were good, but it was still the least visited Disney theme park that now Disney is sinking enormous sums of money in to make it more appealing. Some of that money is going into a massive lake, new pavement and landscaping because it turns out, people like when theme parks look like parks. It's what Universal is boasting about when discussing Celestial Park.

Disney fans love the dopamine effect that comes with new attraction announcements, but they often don't realize what goes away until it's too late. This isn't a concern with losing Tom Sawyer Island and the Riverboat specifically, it's about a disregard for operations, attraction variety and placemaking entirely in and effort to maximize marketing. It's the Paul Pressler mindset that wanted to replace attractions with gift shops and killed unique stores in favor of generic Pooh plush and t-shirts, taken to a new extreme. Now whole buildings and lands are being overhauled to be "more Disney", while forgetting what made those spaces "Disney" in the first place.

A low capacity kiddie ride and a noisy thrill attraction are not what this specific acreage of the park needed. Tom Sawyer Island was a place for kids to run around, while still holding appeal to adults much more than subsequent play areas built in Disney's theme parks. The Riverboat was a relaxing ride that did not require reservations to see and was popular with older guests who cannot do more intense rides. Both attractions could also be seen by those not experiencing them which added to the overall ambience of the park. It's possible the new Cars ride will do the same, but again, it's something that's being worked into an area that was built from scratch to have this specific river as a focal point and backdrop. Replacing that and a half century of natural tree growth instead of just building the ride somewhere else is incredibly short sighted, and probably not the best use of resources either.

But maybe the new metric for Disney theme park success isn't a guest seeing 7.4 attractions in a day, it's a goal for 7.4 lightning lane sales per guest. Driven by a management team risk adverse and focused on consumer product sales and streaming data who still don't understand their product, assets or customers. The Magic Kingdom has been the world's most popular theme park for decades because of things like the RoA and everything else created for and around it. It was put there for a reason, and appreciated as a result.

 

[BenJacobs]

My main gripe with all of this is the Cars IP.

In my opinion, everything in Magic Kingdom should be whimsical (fun, not too serious), and removed from the modern real world. So I don’t think Star Wars or Marvel fit, as they are too serious, real-world, and/or political.

Cars is fairly whimsical, but it’s essentially set in a version of the modern real world. I really love the first Cars film, and the land in California looks great, it would just be better to have it in Hollywood Studios.

If it were a more suitable property, I’d be much more in favour. For example, it could be a Pocahontas themed river rapids.

 

[Dizknee_Phreek]

We have Frozen, where does that go? Magic Kingdom! Right, into Epcot.
Now we have Moana, where does that go? Animal Kingdom! Right, into Epcot.
Guardians of the Galaxy, where does that go? Hollywood Studios! Right, into Epcot.

The irony here is that they had the perfect opportunity to shove Cars into Epcot with the TT retheme. But nope...Cars goes to MK

 

[Bocabear]

and we are not getting Radiator Springs....We are getting some other setting not connected to the movies... Not the known and loved film and character location.....we are getting Wilderness Edge... like Galaxy's Edge... A place with lots of rock work and a pay to play ride....and the end of the park as we know it...

 

[peter11435]

My main gripe with all of this is the Cars IP.

In my opinion, everything in Magic Kingdom should be whimsical (fun, not too serious), and removed from the modern real world. So I don’t think Star Wars or Marvel fit, as they are too serious, real-world, and/or political.

Cars is fairly whimsical, but it’s essentially set in a version of the modern real world. I really love the first Cars film, and the land in California looks great, it would just be better to have it in Hollywood Studios.

If it were a more suitable property, I’d be much more in favour. For example, it could be a Pocahontas themed river rapids.

Nothing more whimsical and disconnected from the real world as the Hall of Presidents

 

[Tha Realest]

Poll question:

If this ride was not attached to the cars ip, but was rather called “mickeys off road racing”, and the cars were skinned to be old classic looking cars with the same racing wilderness theme would there be less back lash?

Or is this all to do with getting rid of the boat and river ?

Classic cars and classic Mickey, or the current iteration of Mickey?

 

[GhostHost1000]

 

[Tha Realest]

Ah yes, we are discovering the difference between a theme park and an amusement park. (No real sarcasm directed at you, just the universe.)

Pretty fascinating that Epic Universe set about a sequence of events that prompted Disney - which pioneered and largely perfected the concept of a theme park - to retreat from thematic consistency while their biggest competition leans more into it than they ever have before.

 

[phillip9698]

That’s only painful since they are ignoring those and using this! Haha

They aren’t ignoring them. They have just deemed it not worth using them in order to save an attraction that no longer attracts.

 

[Advisable Joseph]

Internally, "over ROA" is viewed as significantly less expensive than green field development.

Greenfield for MK would involve building over bad soil, possibly below flood level, right? Expensive preparations.

 

[Bocabear]

Honestly the idea of the attraction being Mickey's Off Road Racing in classic cars could be very charming...and placed where the Speedway currently sits...a thematic bridge between Tomorrowland and Fantasyland would be very sweet...Cars characters feel like a natural fir for DHS... perhaps where the Animation Courtyard is would be amazing... Wrong IP for the wrong park again....

 

[TomboyJanet]

So...everyone complains that Disney needs to be more like Universal.
They are in the same IP business. Epic U, except for the central coaster, is ALL IPs.

Cars, as a franchise, is still making lots of money for Disney. Carsland is the most popular land in DCA.
The original film made 10 billion in merch sales and they are still releasing new lines of Cars in toy stores.

Guardians is considered the best Marvel Trilogy and a classic. Its not going away.

Star Wars has been around since 1977 and the land can be easily converted to any timeline, which you can see the beginnings of with the Mandalorian added to MF:SR

Disney does a LOT of research and crunches a lot of numbers before choosing the IPs to put in their parks.

The problem for me is Disney generating park specific is is what placed it on a higher plane of existence than universal I see all this as a step backwards

 

[Advisable Joseph]

I believe he said somewhere earlier in this thread that they have a plan for the expansion bbt. If they would've put cars and villains there it would've blocked any more expansion in the area.

I found this:

Folks, we still have the originals in Disneyland. We're giving up a seldom-used copy for new(ish), more popular attractions. And we still have the entire north area for "Beyond Big Thunder."

We can argue about whether Cars belongs in Frontierland, and what "Frontierland" means. But on the whole, this is a net positive.

I just couldn't disagree more. Especially when there is zero reason to do this - tons of space is available to the north outside the RR berm without touching the RoA.

They're saving that for another expansion.

 

[the_rich]

I found this:

Yea that's it

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

They aren’t ignoring them. They have just deemed it not worth using them in order to save an attraction that no longer attracts.

So I apparently crossed a line myself earlier in this thread so maybe you don’t realize it - but you’re kinda coming across as though you are happy to tell someone like me that what I like about Disney parks is either old fashioned, or boring, or stupid, etc.

To be clear, Tom Sawyer Island as an attraction isn’t particularly interesting to me, I like the views from the River, going inside the mills, and AA’s in the fort haha.

It’s the riverboat and the scenery that Tom Sawyer Island creates that I like.

I would argue that Disneyland proved that if done correctly - they can increase the riverboats popularity by making it a little shorter and adding more elaborate scenery and also honoring the Native Americans. It’s really a win-win-win.

 

[hopemax]

The irony here is that they had the perfect opportunity to shove Cars into Epcot with the TT retheme. But nope...Cars goes to MK

The word on the street is the sponsor (Chevrolet) expressly rejected this option. They are paying for their IP to be the focus, not Pixar.

 

[the_rich]

The word on the street is the sponsor (Chevrolet) expressly rejected this option. They are paying for their IP to be the focus, not Pixar.

And that's the right call.