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.