News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
Was it fully cleared and planned though? I was kinda upset for the opposite reason… I was under the impression that they said “Let’s do Coco Village wait too expensive jk let’s switch to Cars at the last possible second.”

To me, that gives the impression that not a lot of thought was put into this and they kind of spun the Wheel Of IP to see what would replace an iconic American landmark. If they’re replacing it I’d rather think painstaking pre-planning and design happened.
But isn't the First concept art with Coco and Encanto the River's of America itself and just fooling us that this was BEYOND because the way Villains is placed in the back and BTM off to the left. Does it seem without Encanto as a siblings to it is maybe why they went with Cars instead and because Cars is better investment within merchandise!
 

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
To this end, I feel like the Josh D’Amaro approach of announcing attractions once everything has been cleared feels much more slimy than just announcing them when they’re blue sky, as it gives the impression there’s no way we can change their minds and no way to tell when they’ll come about and replace things. (Still not as slimy as how they replaced ODL Scary Adventures at least, but maybe in the future they’ll go down to that level). It’s probably the sliminess of it all that has so many people angry.
I feel the same, if the change is necessary why hide it for any Boos. You already got the Villains announcement for people to rave and cheer about. You already got some silence for Cars just only because the audience thought there was not going to be Villains anymore but don't you know they save the best for last.. so they are acting as if Cars was replacing River's of America and even Villain's the way they were acting.
 

phillip9698

Well-Known Member
I feel the same, if the change is necessary why hide it for any Boos. You already got the Villains announcement for people to rave and cheer about. You already got some silence for Cars just only because the audience thought there was not going to be Villains anymore but don't you know they save the best for last.. so they are acting as if Cars was replacing River's of America and even Villain's the way they were acting.

Corporate reveal events exist to drum up hype and excitement for a product they wish to sell. They aren’t there as focus panels for fans to receive all pertinent design plans and give constructive feedback.

Asking the question “why didn’t they just tell us even though they knew we would boo for the entire world to see” shows a complete lack of understanding what these events are for and the customer’s (you) relationship with the corporation (them).
 

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
Corporate reveal events exist to drum up hype and excitement for a product they wish to sell. They aren’t there as focus panels for fans to receive all pertinent design plans and give constructive feedback.

Asking the question “why didn’t they just tell us even though they knew we would boo for the entire world to see” shows a complete lack of understanding what these events are for and the customer’s (you) relationship with the corporation (them).
The topic of matter at hand here isn't about what the D23 event is for...*
 
Last edited:

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
But isn't the First concept art with Coco and Encanto the River's of America itself and just fooling us that this was BEYOND because the way Villains is placed in the back and BTM off to the left.
My understanding is the coco show building had to be “beyond” big thunder and that’s why other options were looked at.

I’m still thinking the cars ride was originally being developed for Tomorrowland.
 

Old Mouseketeer

Well-Known Member
Losing ROA is a leg amputation without anesthesia.
As the resident leg amputee here, I WILL make the gratuitous amputation jokes here, thank you very much. Losing ROA is gut wrenching, baffling, and outrageous. But it's far less then the post-op pain of an amputation, much less the surgery without anesthesia. Oh, the hyperbole! LOL
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
My understanding is the coco show building had to be “beyond” big thunder and that’s why other options were looked at.

I’m still thinking the cars ride was originally being developed for Tomorrowland.

Everything that exists is 'beyond big thunder'... from a certain point of view. Speaking of which:


If they pitched Pixar Boats, maybe we can keep ROA ;)

Move this Cars attraction to Galaxy's Edge and make them transportation droids!!
 

Rhinocerous

Premium Member
My understanding is the coco show building had to be “beyond” big thunder and that’s why other options were looked at.

I’m still thinking the cars ride was originally being developed for Tomorrowland.
I'm sure the Disney company uses different criteria than I would for planning their theme park "expansions". That said, if locating something "beyond" Big Thunder is a dealbreaker for the "beyond Big Thunder" project, shouldn't that be seen as a huge red flag?
 

Mr. Sullivan

Well-Known Member
I'm sure the Disney company uses different criteria than I would for planning their theme park "expansions". That said, if locating something "beyond" Big Thunder is a dealbreaker for the "beyond Big Thunder" project, shouldn't that be seen as a huge red flag?
It could in some situations, absolutely. But I think we have too little to go off of with that at the moment.

I’m sure there’s a number of reasons something may not be viewed as suitable for a certain plot. We know they considered it, but clearly there was a reason they decided not to. They’re not unwilling to build back there as we’re seeing with Villains, so I would have to imagine there was something specifically about the Coco attraction itself that made placing it there an issue in their eyes.
 
Last edited:

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
It could in some situations, sure it is. But I think we have too little to go off of with that at the moment.

I’m sure there’s a number of reasons something may not be viewed as suitable for a certain plot. We know they considered it, but clearly there was a reason they decided not to. They’re not unwilling to build back there as we’re seeing with Villains, so I would have to imagine there was something specifically about the Coco attraction itself that made placing it there an issue in their eyes.

I thought someone posted here that the costs associated with Coco were too high. Also wonder if they feared pushback because it’s something from another country in a land themed to Americana.

I got very strong vibes from the posts on this board that Coco was the strong frontrunner right up until the last minute at D23. I wish it would have won out. A village based on the movie could be amazing if properly designed and funded.
 

Mr. Sullivan

Well-Known Member
I thought someone posted here that the costs associated with Coco were too high. Also wonder if they feared pushback because it’s something from another country in a land themed to Americana.

I got very strong vibes from the posts on this board that Coco was the strong frontrunner right up until the last minute at D23. I wish it would have won out. A village based on the movie could be amazing if properly designed and funded.
I wouldn’t have minded Coco. I actually think it would be great for the area because Spanish culture is so deeply tied into large parts of the western Frontier.
 

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
I thought someone posted here that the costs associated with Coco were too high. Also wonder if they feared pushback because it’s something from another country in a land themed to Americana.

I got very strong vibes from the posts on this board that Coco was the strong frontrunner right up until the last minute at D23. I wish it would have won out. A village based on the movie could be amazing if properly designed and funded.
What I heard was it was between Coco and Cars they had a meeting and the determining conclusion came down to Cars because of how well Cars would return revenue in merchandising and financial returns. Cars has two attractions so would've Coco only had one? Would Coco carried the entire same amount of plot of where Cars is and it replacing the ROA an TSI?
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
What I heard was it was between Coco and Cars they had a meeting and the determining conclusion came down to Cars because of how well Cars would return revenue in merchandising and financial returns. Cars has two attractions so would've Coco only had one? Would Coco carried the entire same amount of plot of where Cars is and it replacing the ROA an TSI?
All plans would have resulted in the removal of TSI and the riverboat. Even the ones from 20 years ago that didn’t feature Cars or Coco.
 

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
1000061706.jpg


You can vision this Beyond or as Replacing ROA and TSI. Villains and Big Thunder are in place and Coco where Cars is. Encanto Casita looks though it be sitting where Haunted Mansion is or more Libery Square. You don't see Haunted Mansion so either it's to cover up anyone from claiming this is not an expansion at the time or this concept art really is a vision for Beyond Big Thunder with even Villain's in an expansion area beyond the park and not where it is to be today.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom