News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

SpaceMountain77

Well-Known Member
Taking the current aesthetics, addition of two cars attractions, and changing of the timeline, it seems that Frontierland becomes more akin to present day Utah and, specifically, Park City and Monument Valley. However, Tiana's Bayou Adventure would still be the outlier.

1724176656525.png
 

CoasterCowboy67

Well-Known Member
7DMT is a good semi-recent example.

That one certainly has one side that is better than the other.

So does the more recent Moana walk-through in terms of guest facing areas.
And that’s fine, but no side looks like a box show building. It’s purposely de-emphasized in the “back” so you don’t have a seven dwarves mine in front of a seaside castle. Cars can do the same
 

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
Taking the current aesthetics, addition of two cars attractions, and changing of the timeline, it seems that Frontierland becomes more akin to present day Utah and, specifically, Park City and Monument Valley. However, Tiana's Bayou Adventure would still be the outlier.

View attachment 810779
This is the kind of vibe it's giving me, too. I guess the question is whether this is a more compelling theme than setting the land back in the 19th/early-20th century. Personally, I kind of feel like people would just go to these places if they were particularly interested in experiencing them and that they are essentially designed to reference the period Frontierland is attempting to recreate. That leaves Frontierland going from being a recreation of a specific time and place to feeling like a recreation of a recreation of a time and place.
 

Schmidt

Well-Known Member
It amazes me how we have people on this thread that sound like they work for Disney or are Disney shareholders when they give their opinion on why they think it's a good idea to move forward with this. Who, outside of Disney/shareholders cares about "efficient use of space" and "maximizing ROI" and all of that? Why should the average guest care if there is an area that is "underutilized"? How does that affect a guests experience? We all know why Disney is doing this, but it is stunning how many people support it based almost solely on Disney's financial interests-it makes them sound like corporate bootlickers. Newsflash to those people-Disney doesn't care if you agree with them.
It amazes me how attached people are to a river that is not all that impressive to begin with.
I'm going to wait for the finished product and it will come down to execution.
It can be done well and I'm thrilled to be getting this version of Cars.
 

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
It amazes me how attached people are to a river that is not all that impressive to begin with.
I'm going to wait for the finished product and it will come down to execution.
It can be done well and I'm thrilled to be getting this version of Cars.
People, humans like water.
Probably because it is life sustaining.
People love waterfronts, be them riverside, oceanside, or lakeside.
It's a universal thing.
People like fountains, and pools too.
Who's to measure impressive?
The vision of the riverboat rounding the bend and sounding its horn is impressive to me.
Matter of fact, of the four framed images I have on my wall taken at the parks - one of them is the boat coming up in the background behind one of my sons.
The river is one of the few naturalistic areas in the park.
 
Last edited:

Schmidt

Well-Known Member
WDW Pro claims that the influencers speaking out against this is potentially causing Disney to reconsider their decision to fill in the entire river, instead leaving only the bottom half of the Island/river, with Cars relocated where the top half used to be. Is he a reliable source? Also, for some of the trusted sources on here, does this have any truth to it?
He is the last guy I listen to.
He clearly has an axe to grind. He doesn't even pretend. Sky is always falling with that guy.
 

V_L_Raptor

Well-Known Member
I think the park that most fulfils this vision of how they should be organised at WDW is DHS. Even with the dead space of abandoned facilities that plagues a lot (all?) of the parks, that is the most tightly-packed when it comes to attractions, dining, and retail versus theming and open spaces.

People can prefer that sort of park to one that has things like the Rivers of America, World Showcase Lagoon, Discovery River, or all the lawns and gardens of the other parks. The bad organisation doesn't help, but it does generally require less walking from attraction to attraction. In general, though, I think people find it the least pleasant of the parks in which to be.

Wouldn't it be great if DHS expanded to take on adjacent land plots, maybe even have some kind of ride of its own to go between those land plots? And maybe they could have an entrance on each of those plots, and people could go and see all the IP lands and rides and stuff they wanted to see there, and then they could hop that train and go over to the main DHS to see whatever they wanted to see in that part of the park?

Like, not necessarily a new gate like IOA. Just an expansion somewhere that people don't have to pay six grand to sleep in a cubicle for two nights, and they could ferry back and forth by whatever transportation attraction Disney would want to cook up.

Wouldn't that be cool? It'd also be off topic here, except that they could put their offroad Cars rally somewhere in there, too.

It'd be neat. Could even be a wild D23 panel...

Oh, well.
 

jason976

Member
LOL, exactly my thoughts, I felt like I was losing my mind seeing some of those comments. It’s one thing if you’re genuinely excited for the change as a guest, that’s great, but if all you’re talking about is how the space is underutilized and using all this corporate speak, that’s when I shake my head.
They can both be true. Some of us can be excited for the change and the new land and understand why it makes sense from a corporate/business perspective at the same time.
 

Schmidt

Well-Known Member
Yes, we all know why Burbank hates Tom Sawyer's Island and Mark Twain and Fronteir land and American Adventure...etc.

The problem is that you really are not allowed to talk about that because it gets people upset and feelings get hurt. This forum is intended to be a space free of hurt feelings.

Not everbody has thick skin...so it's best NOT to discuss Burbank and the historic controversy of this period of American history. There are other Disney forums where this can be discussed more freely.

So,...let's resist and protest Disney's destruction of the Rivers of America, Tom Sawyer Island and the Liberty Bell using the OTHER dozen legitimate arguments on why it should stay.

Disney...do you "really" want a 5+ year "Epcot-style" BOMB CRATER in such a high profile area of Magic Kingom?? All while Epic Universe is swallowing up your guests during those 5 years?

Dont wall up MK!...leave the river and build Cars in an EMPTY area. Make MK look it's VERY BEST while Epic Universe is trying to eat your lunch!!!

An "ugly" MK will have a harder time competing against a brand new, shiny, sparkling Epic Universe!
Ill admit that Universals Epic will absolutely garner alot of interest next year. With that said, I don't think Epic is going to be the Magic Kingdom killer you think it is. They have been filling their parks with coasters, and Harry Potter. I don't see them diversifying near enough. I also see their 2 current parks are not in the best shape and need some real TLC. That joke of Dreamworks land proves my point.

Be hard on Disney but don't give Universal a free pass. Did you know to go to Epic next year, Universal is forcing you to buy a 3 Day ticket. If that was Disney you would be losing your mind right now. Take off the Rose colored Universal glasses.
 

Beacon Joe

Well-Known Member
Thematically, if they were to pull from an existing Disney IP, there are more appropriate ones but they wouldn't move as much merch and since this is only about money and corporate centergy and likely extending the merchandising life of a franchise that's had way more success with it's merch than fan or critical favor concerning the actual movies that merch is based on, we get Cars here. 🤷‍♂️

They should have gone with the Brother Bear IP, with the twist that when Koda (IIRC) asks, "why do they hate us," he'd be talking not about hunters (also IIRC), but about former shareholders and former park fans.

edit to add: I think I may be the one person who actually sort of liked that movie.
 

Charlie The Chatbox Ghost

Well-Known Member
You know, at this point, all I'm really hoping for is for there to be a river bordering the Cars stuff. I'm fully convinced there's no saving TSI/Liberty Belle, so I'm not going to bother fighting for them, especially with the reality being that Cars will be a better capacity eater.
They should have gone with the Brother Bear IP, with the twist that when Koda (IIRC) asks, "why do they hate us," he'd be talking not about hunters (also IIRC), but about former shareholders and former park fans.

edit to add: I think I may be the one person who actually sort of liked that movie.
I like Brother Bear, but there's a 0% chance it'll be in the parks nowadays. They didn't even use any of its songs for the new Country Bears.
 

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
I don't think having an IP in and of itself is the problem.

The issue with modern Disney is that rather than Imagineering picking appropriate IP that ties into something (or going with something original of their own creation - either way) for a new attraction, management tells them what IP they want used and where the attraction needs to go and then it's up to them to figure out how to come up with some way to make sense of that.

In this case, I don't think I'd feel much differently about these changes if it were for a ride using generic jeep-style antonymous self driving vehicles doing the same thing but I'm confident they wouldn't fill in Rivers of America to plop this kind of ride in if it didn't have a cars tie-in.

I'm guessing if ROA had to go and Imagineering were tasked simply with a replacement that fit the theme of Frontierland, we'd be getting something entirely different that wouldn't involve modern-styled looking vehicles at all.

Thematically, if they were to pull from an existing Disney IP, there are more appropriate ones but they wouldn't move as much merch and since this is only about money and corporate centergy and likely extending the merchandising life of a franchise that's had way more success with it's merch than fan or critical favor concerning the actual movies that merch is based on, we get Cars here. 🤷‍♂️

What do you think?

Do you believe we'd be getting this kind of ride in this spot without this particular IP?


Like most, I also don't have anything specifically against Cars. Looking at the park as a guest who's paying to be there rather than an executive looking to "maximize value", I just don't agree that location is the appropriate place.
Imagine if it was Goofy and Max Frontier Wilderness Adventure and the merch of Goofy and Max plushes. It was one idea for Splash Mountain as well!
 

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
LOL, exactly my thoughts, I felt like I was losing my mind seeing some of those comments. It’s one thing if you’re genuinely excited for the change as a guest, that’s great, but if all you’re talking about is how the space is underutilized and using all this corporate speak, that’s when I shake my head.
Had Universal Epic Universe not brought a Dark Universe than I be for certain a Villain's Land would only be sitting in the archives. In fact many of the new announcements especially the Door Coaster ideas from the past why it's being brought back is to respond to Epic Universe.

My hope is when everyone and they all see all the kinetic water and park flushed lakes activity from Celestial Park next year that it makes them realize what letting go of Fountain of Nation's or a River's of America only spot of Magic Kingdom is needed.. just keep a loop of the river.

Who know's to this point if a Cars Land would of gone to another park like DHS here had there been no Dark Universe in development over at Universal.*
 

SamusAranX

Well-Known Member
Not at all -
I want new attractions. I want better attractions. I go to Disney for the ATTRACTIONS.

I like the look of the land they designed, the idea that Frontierland is evolving and is more than an old-timey-western feel, and I like that underutilized space is in plans to be re-developed to a new thrill ride as well as a smaller ride for families. I can run around outside in the woods anytime I want - but i go to Disney for rides.
Frontierland isn’t evolving, it’s being deconstructed to the point where it won’t be Frontierland.
 

wannabeBelle

Well-Known Member
OK I havent read all of the pages in this thread so if this has been discussed previously accept my apologies. I have no problem with the IP and the idea sounded good with another mountain range within the attraction. Destroying ROA to do this is a travesty. A podcast I listened to yesterday had suggested that Disney is surprised at the negative feedback they are getting on the demise of ROA. Dont know why they thought it would be anything else. Said podcast went on to say that this MIGHT be being reconsidered and that maybe portions of ROA might be preserved. I would like to see TSI utilized more, maybe as a family friendly play area that is a little quieter for families to relax, and have the Cars attraction back behind BTMRR and Tiana's Bayou/Splash. Do we think there is any chance to save ROA? Marie
 

Quietmouse

Well-Known Member
OK I havent read all of the pages in this thread so if this has been discussed previously accept my apologies. I have no problem with the IP and the idea sounded good with another mountain range within the attraction. Destroying ROA to do this is a travesty. A podcast I listened to yesterday had suggested that Disney is surprised at the negative feedback they are getting on the demise of ROA. Dont know why they thought it would be anything else. Said podcast went on to say that this MIGHT be being reconsidered and that maybe portions of ROA might be preserved. I would like to see TSI utilized more, maybe as a family friendly play area that is a little quieter for families to relax, and have the Cars attraction back behind BTMRR and Tiana's Bayou/Splash. Do we think there is any chance to save ROA? Marie

Which podcast and they are reliable?

i sort of realized the best money making idea for Disney would be to dock the boat, turn it into a lounge with live jazz and appetizers, with the lower level maybe for meet and greets.

A lot of the lounges at Disney are low capacity, meaning Disney has to turn away a lot of guests because of low capacity allowance.

Turning the boat into a lounge would easily be the biggest lounge on Disney theme park property and could be a huge revenue generator.

I’m just at the stage of acceptance but also figuring out how to preserve at least a portion of the river and the boat.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom