News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Gusey]

this is exactly it. Everyone who supports this and justifies it by saying "It's just one area of the park" or "It's just one attraction" are missing the point entirely. These "it's just something small" changes compiled over decades significantly degrade the park experience. It's the same reason the parks are just becoming their own list of IP to experience rather than a cohesive theme. Disney didn't become popular because you could experience the latest hit movie there, they became popular because it was an entire world of one normally cohesive story (yes you could nitpick for days which short-lived show or attraction doesn't fit this idea but still). Unfortunately the new visitors to WDW now only have a shred of what that cohesiveness used to be like so even when you try to explain it to them they simply don't understand what used to exist. It might sound harsh but I genuinely don't think people understand what they like sometimes and what draws them into the parks. Sure you might book that trip to see the newest attraction but the reason you actually feel confident spending the thousands to do so is because you are pining on it being an out-of-this-world experience, not because of that one actual attraction. If the small chinks in the armor of cohesiveness continue over decades, that confidence in spending your money will go down and I think we're already starting to see that.

Going to play devil's advocate though and ask, should Disney just be catering to long-term fans and refuse to replace opening day attractions? They need to appeal to all audience, the old and the new, in order to get people to return. I'm not saying that Cars fits into Froniterland, but sometimes some old attractions do need replacing to add something that will appeal to a broader audience

 

[harryk]

To ruin a paddle boat that has been a WDW classic for years to be replaced with cars is a shame and not a well thought out idea. The Magic Kingdom is not about cars or a multitude of Roller Coasters. The Magic Kingdom is about a relaxing time and enchantment of days gone by with a few great rides scattered around. Can you imagine Main Street USA now Futuristic style road or Cinderella's Castle reduced to fancy Condo's. The Paddle Wheel boat is an iconic classy experience of yester years. How about Walt's Train and the love of them. Magic Kingdom is relaxing, entertaining, getting the mind revved up for all the lands and adventures that awaits. I know things do evolve but Magic Kingdom is about living in yester year that had a real peaceful relaxing time when this country was evolving to what it is today. Those old-time charms are beautiful. Why can't they simply add Cars to another piece of property around the Kingdom? There is something so special about when you first enter into Magic Kingdom and see the old time overlay and balloons and shops, Horses Singers, Old time costumes and color and see the castle in the distance. Then onto to Liberty Square where you see that paddle boat and the thrill of riding something of yesteryear that use to fill the great rivers in the USA. Magic Kingdom is the nicest, colorful entrance to any park that I have ever been in. It's just so inviting and makes you smile, and your senses come alive. It's Walt's dream and imagination and a feel of connection to this place.

Maybe I am old or not wanting change on certain things in this park. This park is where dreams do come alive, and the possibility of adventure awaits. Elephants fly, we encounter pirates and visit a Haunted Mansion filled with ghost's and dive deep into space. We take the Jungle cruise to see exotic animals and river encounters in the jungle.

Any other Disney Park Cars could go and fit. But The Magic Kingdom is where WDW all begins. That's why I hate to see cars placed in and the Paddle Boat removed.

Great to see someone thinking the same as I am thinking. I remember Walt on one of the Sunday shows telling us about the Florida Project. There is enough space to add to all their thoughts and desires in the future. Instead of removing an attraction they have the space to add attractions. Yes, they show a Villain's Land beyond Thunder Mountain, a cars land can go there also. Keep the Rivers of America and Tom Sawyer Island. It is a shame that current management is all about eliminating attractions to add attractions.

 

[Bocabear]

Going to play devil's advocate though and ask, should Disney just be catering to long-term fans and refuse to replace opening day attractions? They need to appeal to all audience, the old and the new, in order to get people to return. I'm not saying that Cars fits into Froniterland, but sometimes some old attractions do need replacing to add something that will appeal to a broader audience

So add an attraction that fits the "land" and Park they are putting it in. Cars fits absolutely nothing in the Magic Kingdom... I am all for a Carsland area...but the park that has the least attractions (DHS) needs it... MK would be better off with the Coco boat ride or something actually themed to the American Frontier... Something that would not involve destroying the central feature for two lands that would also kill two currenntly running attractions...They are forever altering the fabric of the park for this shoehorned addition....
Yeah, I get wanting to add fresh attractions, but the cost of this is too dear. Choose something else that works better with the feel of the park...or put this whole mess where the Speedway is and retheme the Fantasyland train station to fit the National Parks theme.. remove the circus tens and splash pad and add that as part of that area as it's own miniland.

 

[FettFan]

Going to play devil's advocate though and ask, should Disney just be catering to long-term fans and refuse to replace opening day attractions? They need to appeal to all audience, the old and the new, in order to get people to return. I'm not saying that Cars fits into Froniterland, but sometimes some old attractions do need replacing to add something that will appeal to a broader audience

No. They can be changed as needed.

Case in point: Jungle Cruise’s recent changes. They didn’t just bulldoze the thing and build Indiana Jones on top of its grave.

 

[Rhinocerous]

No. They can be changed as needed.

Case in point: Jungle Cruise’s recent changes. They didn’t just bulldoze the thing and build Indiana Jones on top of its grave.

Fun fact: They offered the Jungle Cruise plot to Indy first, but he said

 

[Gusey]

So add an attraction that fits the "land" and Park they are putting it in. Cars fits absolutely nothing in the Magic Kingdom... I am all for a Carsland area...but the park that has the least attractions (DHS) needs it... MK would be better off with the Coco boat ride or something actually themed to the American Frontier... Something that would not involve destroying the central feature for two lands that would also kill two currenntly running attractions...They are forever altering the fabric of the park for this shoehorned addition....
Yeah, I get wanting to add fresh attractions, but the cost of this is too dear. Choose something else that works better with the feel of the park...or put this whole mess where the Speedway is and retheme the Fantasyland train station to fit the National Parks theme.. remove the circus tens and splash pad and add that as part of that area as it's own miniland.

We're all now discovering that "Beyond Big Thunder" was just code for RoA. Hypothetically, If they did announce a Coco attraction or something themed to American Frontier to replaced RoA, would we still be seeing the same reaction?

 

[Gusey]

No. They can be changed as needed.

Case in point: Jungle Cruise’s recent changes. They didn’t just bulldoze the thing and build Indiana Jones on top of its grave.

Out of curiosity, what changes would you make to update Tom Sawyer's Island, rather than replace it. Bear in mind the massive elephant of the room that is the ADA, so accessibility has to be considered in any construction plans on the island. "The ADA requires that all new construction of places of public accommodation, as well as of "commercial facilities" such as office buildings, be accessible." Tom Sawyer Island is the most inaccessible area of WDW and its closure was inevitable for that sole reason. It was either leave it in disrepair or build something new with access for people with disabilities

 

[Bocabear]

Out of curiosity, what changes would you make to update Tom Sawyer's Island, rather than replace it. Bear in mind the massive elephant of the room that is the ADA, so accessibility has to be considered in any construction plans on the island. "The ADA requires that all new construction of places of public accommodation, as well as of "commercial facilities" such as office buildings, be accessible." Tom Sawyer Island is the most inaccessible area of WDW and its closure was inevitable for that sole reason. It was either leave it in disrepair or build something new with access for people with disabilities

Why are those the only two choices? Why not keep it up as a legacy attraction in the park... They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island. Bring back some meaningful food service to Aunt Polly's...which might drive some attendance and get people over to the island to explore again... Most people don't even know what is over there....and it is all pretty great!

 

[Tha Realest]

We're all now discovering that "Beyond Big Thunder" was just code for RoA. Hypothetically, If they did announce a Coco attraction or something themed to American Frontier to replaced RoA, would we still be seeing the same reaction?

Because “Beyond Big Thunder” conjures up a sense of mystery, intrigue, and adventure.

“Adjacent to Big Thunder” doesn’t have the same ring to it.

 

[Gusey]

Why are those the ponly two choices? Why not keep it up as a legacy attraction in the park... They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island. Bring back some meaningful food service to Aunt Polly's...which might drive some attendance and get people over to the island to explore again... Most people don't even know what is over there....and it is all pretty great!

That's the main issue. If they did anything on Tom Sawyer's they'd need to make the whole island ADA accessible, including the rafts to Tom Sawyer's which currently cannot support any kind of wheelchair. A similar thing happened when Toontown in Disneyland got updated, it subtly became more ADA accessible with a longer less steep path under the tunnel, and wheelchair accessible slides at Goofy's

 

[DisneyHead123]

Going to play devil's advocate though and ask, should Disney just be catering to long-term fans and refuse to replace opening day attractions? They need to appeal to all audience, the old and the new, in order to get people to return. I'm not saying that Cars fits into Froniterland, but sometimes some old attractions do need replacing to add something that will appeal to a broader audience

There seems to be this assumption on here recently that casual Disney fans, or younger Disney fans, or newer Disney fans have totally different desires for the parks than “true blue” type fans. This could be true, but I don’t think it should be assumed as a given.

I was talking about “Instagram aesthetics” recently in another comment (you know those hashtag type things you see like “Cottagecore”) and it really made me think about how the internet generation has a unique and pretty strong relationship with visuals. Design trends used to be something that you maybe saw in a book, or in person. Now there are inspiration boards, Pinterest boards, hashtags, photo shoots… I think design is more important than ever and reaches a broader audience than ever before. I think the average visitor probably has higher expectations for the parks than is sometimes assumed. That’s why the Cars thing seems so inexplicable to me - who is the target audience for this? Kids around 7 and under, sure, but they would enjoy it just as much in HS. Who is supposed to be enjoying the immersive experience of Mater in Frontier land though?

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Why are those the ponly two choices? Why not keep it up as a legacy attraction in the park... They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island. Bring back some meaningful food service to Aunt Polly's...which might drive some attendance and get people over to the island to explore again... Most people don't even know what is over there....and it is all pretty great!

Because those are really the only 2 choices that make any financial sense, or utilization of the park sense.

The current version of TSI is underutilized. Disney likely has specific data on this based upon numbers of people taking the rafts per day, but anyone who is at the park can see with there eyes, people are not electing to visit the island, and certainly not in the numbers that other "attractions" are utilized.

So that leaves you with 2 really i guess 3 choices. 1) leave it as is, don't invest time/money in a losing area of the park, and let it just sit there underperforming and costing ROI from lack of utilization in the long run. 2) invest money in turning the island into something people WANT to go see and explore. 3) use the land for something completely new that more people will use and enjoy.

I don't see any logical reason to go with route 1. MK isn't a museum, and the area of land is too big with too much potential to be left as is "for old times sake."

I could see some reasoning behind 2, although i think your going to need major investment in time and money for it to work. The ADA issue is going to be a big one. Your not going to have the same fort/tunnels that you have now. Also i think to truly drive crowds there (i like the food idea, actually I could really see a river side type cafe with seating all along the river in the shade with views looking "in" to the park as being pretty cool....but it would also be a fundamental change from what is there right now) you have to get rid of the raft system and have some form of static ingress/egress to the island (you likely need to do that for the ADA, or completly redesign/replace the rafts to accommodate wheelchairs/scooters, ect.). To be successful you need to have spur of the moment people walking from Tiana and BtRR and seeing lines there and go, hey let me take a quick detour this way. Otherwise unless there is some massive change to the island (and this gets into 3) people don't want to "waste" the time waiting for a raft, getting over to play in a run down fort, and then waiting for a raft to get back.

That leaves us with 3. If people aren't using what is on the island, then you invest money and build something else that people will use. Now I am not going to get into WHAT that should be, at least not here. People can have different opinions on if the choice of what to replace it with is the best one or not. However if your not going to do 1 or 2, all your left with is option 3

 

[Bocabear]

There is a lot more on the island than a "run down fort"...there is a cave to explore, an abandoned mystery mine, a secret escape tunnel... The suspended bridge, the old mill, trails throughtout and up onto the forested hiil... In an age where we keep talking about kids needed a place to run around and explore, there is an island full of exploration...and some really cool stuff to see....

 

[FigmentFan82]

I get it. But I've also never felt the need to visit. So many other things to do and see at MK. I, like many here I think, are more disappointed about the views that will lost as opposed to TSI itself. But I'm also a believer of moving forward and trying new things. Seems like its happening so I guess we all get to see when it opens

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

There is a lot more on the island than a "run down fort"...there is a cave to explore, an abandoned mystery mine, a secret escape tunnel... The suspended bridge, the old mill, trails throughtout and up onto the forested hiil... In an age where we keep talking about kids needed a place to run around and explore, there is an island full of exploration...and some really cool stuff to see....

But there really isn't.

First I don't bring my kids to WDW so that they have a place to run around and explore, nor do I think most parents. Finding activities to do and play that are not screen based is a laudable goal, but its not a theme park. My kids love fishing, hiking, running through nature trails, and do all those things...at home, or near home in county parks/woods that do NOT need a flight to Florida, thousands of dollars in hotel rooms, park tickets, travel costs, or my PTO days.

Second, there isn't some really cool stuff to see on the island. I know that, and WDW knows that, because people AREN"T GOING AND SEE IT. You might personally like it. Heck, I think its ok from a nostalgia point of view, but if most people don't think its worth going to explore....its not cool. Which is the whole point about it being underutilized

 

[lazyboy97o]

That's the main issue. If they did anything on Tom Sawyer's they'd need to make the whole island ADA accessible, including the rafts to Tom Sawyer's which currently cannot support any kind of wheelchair. A similar thing happened when Toontown in Disneyland got updated, it subtly became more ADA accessible with a longer less steep path under the tunnel, and wheelchair accessible slides at Goofy's

It’s not the main issue because that’s not the actual standard.

 

[Gusey]

It’s not the main issue because that’s not the actual standard.

But it should be, especially since the introduction of their 5th key Inclusion (Welcoming and respecting different viewpoints and people. Placed at the heart of all the Keys, it is deeply connected to any of the other Four Keys.)

There is a lot more on the island than a "run down fort"...there is a cave to explore, an abandoned mystery mine, a secret escape tunnel... The suspended bridge, the old mill, trails throughtout and up onto the forested hiil... In an age where we keep talking about kids needed a place to run around and explore, there is an island full of exploration...and some really cool stuff to see....

All of which isn't ADA accessible. If Disney decided to upgrade Tom Sawyer Island, they'd need to add something so people with disabilities could experience the attraction, particularly with the crossing. When they did Adventureland Treehouse at Disneyland, they added the portraits of the rooms at the bottom of the tree so any guests unable to climb could still see the rooms.

All of this is not to say that Cars fits into Frontierland, but that the closure of Tom Sawyer Island was inevitable

 

[lazyboy97o]

But it should be, especially since the introduction of their 5th key Inclusion (Welcoming and respecting different viewpoints and people. Placed at the heart of all the Keys, it is deeply connected to any of the other Four Keys.)

All of which isn't ADA accessible. If Disney decided to upgrade Tom Sawyer Island, they'd need to add something so people with disabilities could experience the attraction, particularly with the crossing. When they did Adventureland Treehouse at Disneyland, they added the portraits of the rooms at the bottom of the tree so any guests unable to climb could still see the rooms.

All of this is not to say that Cars fits into Frontierland, but that the closure of Tom Sawyer Island was inevitable

If you’re not actually familiar with a code, then don’t cite it as a reason.

Should be and must be are not the same.

Disneyland Resort has the alternate experiences because they meet requirements in state law, not federal law. What you conveniently have not pointed out is that Disneyland did increase the accessibility of Tom Sawyer Island. So no, it’s not an inevitable ADA issue.

 

[Gusey]

If you’re not actually familiar with a code, then don’t cite it as a reason.

I did my degree on the ADA so I'm very familiar. Whilst I'm not familiar with Florida specific laws, I do know that disability access is a big issue and something that the ADA tackles, and that it can cause issues with construction.

Disneyland Resort has the alternate experiences because they meet requirements in state law, not federal law. What you conveniently have not pointed out is that Disneyland did increase the accessibility of Tom Sawyer Island. So no, it’s not an inevitable ADA issue.

True, Disneyland's Tom Sawyer does have wheelchair accessible rafts and pathways. The only exception is that at the time Disney was willing to invest in the island as they were tying it into Pirates of the Caribbean. Today, the island at Disneyland is also in a state of disrepair with lots of effects not working. With the island's dwindling population and Disney's obsession for revenue, Disney had to make the decision to either upgrade Magic Kingdom's Tom Sawyer Island, including making it ADA accessible (especially if they reopened Aunt Polly's), leave it to lose popularity again or replace it. They've chosen route 3. I'm just trying to give an alternative viewpoint as to why they're closing Tom Sawyer's Island instead of they wanted to add Cars somewhere and decided Frontierland would do

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island.

I don't know that they would really get the choice to do this. ADA compliance, at least in the last few years, has been pretty all or nothing if they start it.