News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Raineman]

Don't worry. You will hit acceptance soon enough.

To quote Steve Rogers: don't hold your breath.

 

[Schmidt]

I am Gen-X.

The classics they are starting to remove are the non-IP attractions, which is part of the issue. Disney theme parks used to have that perfect mix of IP and non-IP based attractions. Recently, new attractions have been centered on more recent IP, and now we are starting to see classic attractions-like Roa/TSI-being replaced by attractions with more recent IP. It makes me worried about the future of Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion, Pirates, Tiki Room, etc.

Why? Why does it need to be replaced?

- Splash IP was changed for social issues. Not saying I agree with it but the decision wasn't made specifically to remove non ip product.
- ROA and TSI don't help with capacity at all. That's why they are being removed.

Pirates and Haunted Mansion are not going anywhere anytime soon. Jungle cruise could use a little love though.
Disney is not in the museum business.

 

[abaker1975]

Sure, but I will argue it has also created some muddled theming decisions as a result.

Galaxy edge should, at the very least, be adjacent to tomorrow land rather than tucked away above critter land/French quarters area. It’s in a weird spot that doesn’t really make sense?

Disney California adventure…what is the theme even ? The California theming makes sense (to an extent right ? ), radiator springs, Pixar pier, grizzly peak, that all is pretty cohesive and makes sense.

I could even argue that avengers campus slightly makes sense if you squint your eyes hard enough.…but the implementation of avatar land just seems very confusing. Slowly but surely the theme has gone from adventuring in California, to let’s slap whichever ip theme that sticks and make a land out of it.

You could argue and say, well that’s what the other Disney parks in Florida do, right?

Well kinda. Avatar in animal kingdom at least has some fabric that you can etch into the over arching theme of animal kingdom (alien animals are technically animals right?).

My overall opinion is that because Disney is running out of space in California they are forced to make decisions to make room for expansion sites with ips that are either located in the wrong spot (galaxy edge) or don’t fit the overall arching theme (avatar in a park about adventure in California).

I hadn't thought of it like that. DCA really is a Theme Park with as many variations in its Theme's to not really have it work as a Californian Themed park. It is basically used as a park to put attractions that don't fit (thematically or area) in Disneyland.

Having an area called Hollywood Land gives them just enough wiggle room to be able to put any attraction based on a movie in the area, but a new land based on Avatar is stretching integrity of the whole park theme too far.

Personally speaking I prefer a park that has the freedom to have diverse themed lands, unfortunately the park name does not suit this.

The good thing about WDW is with having 4 main parks you can make each one have a coherent theme and should mean attractions go in the best fit for each park (but even in Florida with its 4 parks I don't this this really happens).

If they could come up with a way to make DCA a park that is split into three themes - Movies/Animals/Celebration they really would have a park that can take any of the greatest hits from WDW without a problem. The park could even be called World of Disney.

 

[October82]

What you are describing is NOT what I’m talking about.

Then what are you talking about?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Don't worry. You will hit acceptance soon enough.

I haven’t accepted the loss of Adventurers Club yet! Kungaloosh! Haha

 

[Disstevefan1]

In 7 or 8 years when the walls around ROA finally come down, folks will be starved for something new to do in the MK.

To get on the new cars ride, the $50 for LL will be well worth it -
IF you can get a return time.
IF its not raining or a storm is near by.
If its not down.

 

[October82]

Personally speaking I prefer a park that has the freedom to have diverse themed lands, unfortunately the park name does not suit this.

The theme of DCA post 2012 was intended to be the ideals and history of California. That gives you a lot of freedom in principle. As you pointed out, Hollywoodland allows them to copy much of DHS, the pier allows for a lot of classic Disney IP to be used (which was the ~2012 concept), and much of the original park was an attempt to replicate the feel of World Showcase on a smaller scale. Missing Spanish and San Francisco Bay Area areas could have been home to other concepts from WDW or that would easily be at home in WDW parks.

The idea that the California theme can't work for a park or that it's overly restrictive comes mostly from the poor execution of the original version of the park and Disney's refusal to commit to it. It's really a victim of timing where the franchise/IP mandate came just when the park needed the most capital.

 

[Raineman]

- Splash IP was changed for social issues. Not saying I agree with it but the decision wasn't made specifically to remove non ip product.
- ROA and TSI don't help with capacity at all. That's why they are being removed.

Pirates and Haunted Mansion are not going anywhere anytime soon. Jungle cruise could use a little love though.
Disney is not in the museum business.

Can I ask what you mean when you mention capacity? If you simply mean that the Cars attractions will handle more people than TSI/Liberty Belle, you're right. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the park will get more guests, or that it will disperse the crowds so that there is more room to move and breathe while walking around MK, and reduces the lines on the other attractions. If the Cars attractions shift more visitors towards Frontierland that are already there and/or brings more visitors to MK, then Frontierland will become a massive bottleneck.
I regards to Disney theme parks being a museum-they haven't been. Being a museum means that everything in it is something from the fairly distant past, and Disney theme parks have always had a balance of old and new. But if they are easily able to add without replacing, why would they simply replace? Replacing old with new removes that balance that guests have been enjoying for decades.

 

[October82]

In 7 or 8 years when the walls around ROA finally come down, folks will be starved for something new to do in the MK.

To get on the new cars ride, the $50 for LL will be well worth it -
IF you can get a return time.
IF its not raining or a storm is near by.
If its not down.

That's the other half of the issue. An outdoor trackless off-roading ride is a cool concept - and even a decent concept for a Cars attraction - but it shouldn't be a headliner at the costs Disney pays for new attractions. It would have been a nice D-ticket for DCA but MK really should be getting something on the scale of RSR.

 

[el_super]

I haven’t accepted the loss of Adventurers Club yet! Kungaloosh! Haha

Accepting doesn't mean you have to stop missing things. There are still a lot of things I miss at Disneyland.

 

[JD80]

Personally if we ever get to a point where HM or Pirates is constantly operating at 30% capacity and isn't the pull it always was, then yea replace it with something that would do better.

 

[GimpYancIent]

There's enough land here to hold all the ideas and plans we could possibly imagine… but we really don’t need it for Magic Kingdom. We can squeeze all our ideas and plans in there just fine. If we get a new idea, I guess something’s just gotta go!

The current Disney management thought process -

 

[Raineman]

Accepting doesn't mean you have to stop missing things. There are still a lot of things I miss at Disneyland.

It depends on what your definition of acceptance is. "Acceptance" could mean "I will miss the old, but I think I might like the new, and am looking forward to it" "Acceptance" could also mean "Well, they're gonna go ahead with it, and I don't like it" (which would be more along the lines of "resignation" instead of "acceptance").

 

[Dear Prudence]

Knott's has always had a better version of Frontierland and it was right there for Walt to copy from Day 1. There is a roughness to the traditional frontier tropes that is incompatible with Disney. Always has been.

Yawn. Knott's is also a sugar coated version of a West that never was. It's just that, a bunch of tropes manufacturered by the film industry and a bunch of people originally from the East Coast (where the film industry originated) that knew absolutely nothing. We can also thank Easts Coast northerners for the sugar coating of To Kill a Mockingbird.

Disney's Frontierland in Disneyland used to have outlaws and shootouts. I don't think those were removed because of any sort of family friendly sanitizing as much as it was budget cuts.

 

[Raineman]

Personally if we ever get to a point where HM or Pirates is constantly operating at 30% capacity and isn't the pull it always was, then yea replace it with something that would do better.

I think alot of people agree that will never happen, at least not in our lifetime. Those are flagship attractions that have been constantly busy for decades.

 

[Quietmouse]

Yawn. Knott's is also a sugar coated version of a West that never was. It's just that, a bunch of tropes manufacturered by the film industry and a bunch of people originally from the East Coast (where the film industry originated) that knew absolutely nothing. We can also thank Easts Coast northerners for the sugar coating of To Kill a Mockingbird.

Disney's Frontierland in Disneyland used to have outlaws and shootouts. I don't think those were removed because of any sort of family friendly sanitizing as much as it was budget cuts.

I don’t know, the society we live in now, and how we view diversity, acceptance and gun violence definitely does not fly within the realm of shoot outs lol.

Yes our world is more sugar coated now, but that’s the reality of the times.

 

[el_super]

Can I ask what you mean when you mention capacity? If you simply mean that the Cars attractions will handle more people than TSI/Liberty Belle, you're right. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the park will get more guests, or that it will disperse the crowds so that there is more room to move and breathe while walking around MK, and reduces the lines on the other attractions.

If there are more and more E-Ticket rides for people to ride, the losers will be the A through C tier attractions that get used as filler. Think of it more like a top-10 list. People will prioritize their top ten attractions, and everything else has to fight for the scraps.

To be honest, I would have thought COP was next on the chopping block, but it sounds like Hall of Presidents is. After those two I would think Buzz and maybe even Pooh are coming up on the list too.

If the Cars attractions shift more visitors towards Frontierland that are already there and/or brings more visitors to MK, then Frontierland will become a massive bottleneck.

They will need to solve for that.

I regards to Disney theme parks being a museum-they haven't been. Being a museum means that everything in it is something from the fairly distant past, and Disney theme parks have always had a balance of old and new.

Frontierland? Adventureland? The concept of Frontierland and Adventureland are as old now, as the time gap between their original era and the time they were put into the parks. The Jungle Cruise comes from a time where the only real jungle exploration one could do, back in the 1950s, involved either being a millionaire (ha!) or browsing the pages of National Geographic. Today, you can search for any jungle river in the world and get a 4k tour on YouTube within seconds. That's why Disney is turning away from these concepts: they are far too accessible. They aren't novel or exciting anymore. Disney has to lean into IP because it's the kind of content that people can only get from Disney.

But if they are easily able to add without replacing, why would they simply replace? Replacing old with new removes that balance that guests have been enjoying for decades.

You have to replace aging attractions that don't attract people. It's a fundamental fact of being a theme park operated in a capitalist country. If a ride/show/attraction isn't pulling it's weight, the resources devoted to keeping it up and running should be diverted elsewhere. This will be the fact of it, until you find a way to evolve our society away from using money.

 

[October82]

I think alot of people agree that will never happen, at least not in our lifetime. Those are flagship attractions that have been constantly busy for decades.

I would have said the same about the RoA.

 

[Tha Realest]

I don’t know, the society we live in now, and how we view diversity, acceptance and gun violence definitely does not fly within the realm of shoot outs lol.

Disney’s second biggest film of the year is a love letter to gun violence and shoot outs occasionally punctuated by Fox-era Marvel film callbacks and Ryan Reynolds jokes.

 

[Quietmouse]

Disney’s second biggest film of the year is a love letter to gun violence and shoot outs occasionally punctuated by Fox-era Marvel film callbacks and Ryan Reynolds jokes.

Disney owns a wide variety of 3rd party properties (20th century fox? ) that promote violence…but Disney by and large doesn’t promote that within the park, and if it does it’s highly fantasized.