It exists. It was built. It's been developed. Yes, it has history.
I am once again pointing at the sign:
On Integrity
"Now, I have this to say, and I love Disneyland dearly, but when it comes to Walt Disney World -- to hell with Disneyland.
Disneyland has a colorful and unique history. But so does Walt Disney World, and Walt Disney World's history has been slowly whittled away these past few years by thoughtless and presumptive choices, choices held up only by ignorance of the unique local culture of the Florida park.
Walt Disney World needs to start thinking long-term now, now that forty years have breezed past. They need to seek out and maintain a roster of talent who know and have Walt Disney World bound into their blood and every fiber of their body the way Disneyland does. So far, the last two decades they've been content with Marriott hotel managers and accountants, people who don't see past the ends of their own nose. And lots of being led around by the wrist by Disneyland. But Walt Disney World, she isn't the second Disneyland. She's the first Walt Disney World. And she needs to start acting like it."
Penned 12 years ago...
The hiding is a big part of the problem. The space was all organized around an open vista along the implied edge of the river. Dropping in a dramatic, defined edge condition is going to change the space in a way that contradicts its design. Something occupying the river space should be something you can see across the lands to maintain the design language of the lands.That's not the logic of this expansion, though. The proposed design is full of planted areas, full of water and rockwork, and full of decor, often inefficiently so in order to hide the Cars vehicles from the rest of the land.
Exactly. Almost every recent project has been a letdown at worst and stripped down from the artwork significantly at best. There’s not much reason to be confident unfortunatelyI am not sure what Disney has done recently that gives you any sense that this will occur. Also, dissecting the concept art they provide...well, I have learned a lesson or two from that.
The extreme backlash makes me wonder if any of this project will be reconsidered. Most likely not, but it’s definitely a larger than usual backlash
I’m hoping they at least maintain a semblance of the river and dock the boat.
For example, are Cars made in a factory or…ahem…?
… it’s best not to think too hard about the Cars universe.
Right, just saying that this update is not like deleting planters. It's more like filling in planters designed for low floral with large sightline-blocking trees or sculptures.The hiding is a big part of the problem. The space was all organized around an open vista along the implied edge of the river. Dropping in a dramatic, defined edge condition is going to change the space in a way that contradicts its design. Something occupying the river space should be something you can see across the lands to maintain the design language of the lands.
Maybe, conceptually it appears to be a smaller vehicle version of Reign of Kong or Fast and Furious.Isn't that the ride system that was pitched for a Jurassic World/Park ride years ago?
None of this would compare to a brand-new theme park opening up, even if they were all homeruns. The only way Disney could've competed is with a 5th gate opening up around the same time. It's smarter to open this up a couple years after EU is out.I really hope the Disney finance people decide this is to expensive and dont do it. I like the idea of a cars ride, but not at the expense of losing the Liberty Belle, ROA, and TSI. Also, send Cars to the Studios, and give MK something more fitting theme wise (Doesnt have to be IP Driven).
Most of the new announcements seem like a desperate response to the New Epic Universe Park. Except it is to little, and to late. Iger said that they have known about Epic was coming for around 10 years, and they are just now announcing new stuff. They should have announced this stuff 5 years ago, and had some of this stuff up and running starting this year and into next year.
That's not the logic of this expansion, though. The proposed design is full of planted areas, full of water and rockwork, and full of decor, often inefficiently so in order to hide the Cars vehicles from the rest of the land.
The Christler has a bumper sticker that says, "Honk if you love me."Questions I would love to ask Josh D'Amaro:
This is why I don't get invited to media events.
- Does Lightning McQueen purchase life insurance or car insurance?
- The Popemobile appeared in Cars 2, implying the existence of Jesus Christ as an automobile. What make and model was the messiah?
I think Tom Sawyer's island is a well themed area of the park, but I acknowledge the reality that the area is completely dead most of the time and that the Tom Sawyer brand isn't relevant to today's kids. Throughout the 20th Century, Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn were taught in almost every school and were known by almost everybody in the general culture. I'm not sure that's the case anymore.I'm in the Magic Kingdom today. As I walk around Tom Sawyer Island with my wife and kids, I can't help but think "man this place sucks, I can't wait until they rip it out and build something awesome instead."
I saw how beautifully they integrated Galaxy’s Edge at Disneyland into the surroundings of Frontierland and Critter Country.I am not sure what Disney has done recently that gives you any sense that this will occur. Also, dissecting the concept art they provide...well, I have learned a lesson or two from that.
Jesus didn’t just take the wheel: He is the wheel.Has to be a Christler.
But then where will they sell the Bob Iger dolls?They could sell the dolls at the Villains Land store
Here's a thought - maybe they can have the Cars ride be sponsored by Chevron and have the cars from those ads appear alongside Lightning and Mater like Disneyland's Autopia in the 1990s.Cars 2 had a underground parts market where they encounter this car.
![]()
Isn't that basically what they did with Splash Mountain? Go "to heck with maintenance" and let it rot so nobody will have a problem with you tearing it out?That TDO and WDW management has left their Rivers of America to rot for decades now is not the fault of the paying guests who know that, and thus avoid wasting time on a lone riverboat to look at a landscaped drainage canal (my phrase from 2010).
That quote is very misleading. There was absolutely a way to save a portion of the River like in Disneyland. Anyone can argue the merits of saving it, but it could absolutely be saved.In the end, there was no way to save the existing river system. The new lands have major elevation changes that can’t be accomplished without altering the river
The compromise will see it scaled back, they'll incorporate a larger water element and the attraction will be less than because of it.The extreme backlash makes me wonder if any of this project will be reconsidered. Most likely not, but it’s definitely a larger than usual backlash
I’m hoping they at least maintain a semblance of the river and dock the boat.
Anything can happen with enough money. The question is not whether it could’ve been saved but rather was it worth spending 30-40% more on this project to save it, thereby cancelling what could very well become my favorite attraction, and delay the project by a year or more.That quote is very misleading. There was absolutely a way to save a portion of the River like in Disneyland. Anyone can argue the merits of saving it, but it could absolutely be saved.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.