MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ

ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ

Hᴏᴜsᴇ ᴏʄ  Mᴀɢɪᴄ
Premium Member
What if: The previously announced family-friendly second attraction that has yet to be officially mentioned as a "ride" is actually a show, interactive-whatsit, splash pad or... now nothing at all? Or what if: Imagineering took a bit of PLAY! with a layover from the scrapped Sugar Rush Racers VR concept and made an indoor Cars arcade instead? A "Pit Stop" for families with little ones unable to ride the main attraction. (Freely unsolicited armchair. Enjoy!)

//But then you may ask, why have that portion of the Rally Race where the vehicles circle around the second attraction if guests aren't going to really see anything? //

What if: that portion was removed to shave down the budget track to retain some of the Rivers of America and to offer guests a hypothetical indoor option should the outdoor attraction be closed due to "unforeseen circumstances" a.k.a. Rain.

These are the pointless questions that keep me up at night wondering if Imagineering has a clue anymore. And wondering if I need to find a new hobby. I don't. I love this crap!!! But it does make you wonder... Have things changed? Is Carsland still in flux? Is saving ROA a priority? Will the attraction(s) be budget cut? I guess we'll find out soon enough...

...or until the next blog post or concept art.
TL;DR
 
Last edited:
Rutt

Rutt

Well-Known Member
Bleed0range said:
I’ve tried to ignore how much it bothers me they’re taking out ROA, I love Disney… but this is the dumbest idea I think I’ve ever seen them act on. I feel it will ruin the haunted mansion’s aesthetic and liberty square. If they were merely reshaping the river around the cars ride maybe… but this is just depressing to me.
Click to expand...
This I get. I feel the same. I don't mind Cars going in and think the concept can fit but not a big fan of removing ROA.
 
Disone

Disone

Well-Known Member
AidenRodriguez731 said:
"blessing of size is really a relative term. You can expand MK but its hard to at a certain point. It's much easier to get rid of a very poorly performing attraction with high maintenance. and a possible choke point to get to other plots of land later on.
Click to expand...
I think blessing of size is now a lost term. Today you can expand any Walt Disney World park but it's always cheaper to get rid of a older Attraction.

So that option will always win.

{Soap box}

In Walt Disney World's corporate quest to value engineer the value out of everything none of the recent expansions announced for Walt Disney World parks are actual expansions. They're all replacements of existing (or long dormant) attraction pads

If Disneyland can legitimately expand I'm certainly in no position to make excuses for Walt Disney World. And there is absolutely no reason for why Walt Disney WORLD'S four theme parks should have less rides than disneyLAND'S 2 parks. The ride count shouldn't even be close, unless we're going to use the excuse that the Walt Disney World guests genuinely Is more interested in atmospheric experiences, but if they use that excuse then we they cannot justify the removal of Rivers of America in favor of an new Cars attraction.

No excuses except for Walt Disney World is just cheap.

" The parks are not a museum" Is an excuse.

" It's an outdated attraction" Is an excuse.

" It cost too much to maintain" Is an excuse.

There is one reason, Team Disney Orlando completely understands that the Walt Disney World guest is blindly loyal to them and will absolutely accept mediocracy and less value for more cost. Blessing of size Is not needed when your fan base will make the excuses for you.

{Off the soap box}

I know, I am wrong.
 
Disstevefan1

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Disone said:
I think blessing of size is now a lost term. Today you can expand any Walt Disney World park but it's always cheaper to get rid of a older Attraction.

So that option will always win.

{Soap box}

In Walt Disney World's corporate quest to value engineer the value out of everything none of the recent expansions announced for Walt Disney World parks are actual expansions. They're all replacements of existing (or long dormant) attraction pads

If Disneyland can legitimately expand I'm certainly in no position to make excuses for Walt Disney World. And there is absolutely no reason for why Walt Disney WORLD'S four theme parks should have less rides than disneyLAND'S 2 parks. The ride count shouldn't even be close, unless we're going to use the excuse that the Walt Disney World guests genuinely Is more interested in atmospheric experiences, but if they use that excuse then we they cannot justify the removal of Rivers of America in favor of an new Cars attraction.

No excuses except for Walt Disney World is just cheap.

" The parks are not a museum" Is an excuse.

" It's an outdated attraction" Is an excuse.

" It cost too much to maintain" Is an excuse.

There is one reason, Team Disney Orlando completely understands that the Walt Disney World guest is blindly loyal to them and will absolutely accept mediocracy and less value for more cost. Blessing of size Is not needed when your fan base will make the excuses for you.

{Off the soap box}

I know, I am wrong.
Click to expand...
You are “A million percent correct” as knuckles would say.

I blame the leadership for this. I know it’s often said, but in my opinion, I highly doubt Walt would be filling RoA. If he thought the Magic kingdom needed a cars area he world have truly EXPANDED the MK, and the costs would be the costs period.

It’s only the blind loyalists to TWDC that will say you are wrong.

I am ready to be flamed now 🔥
 
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
Disstevefan1 said:
I blame the leadership for this. I know it’s often said, but in my opinion, I highly doubt Walt would be filling RoA. If he thought the Magic kingdom needed a cars area he world have truly EXPANDED the MK, and the costs would be the costs period.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt Walt would fill in the Rivers of America either.

Of course, I also doubt he would've made a live action remake of Snow White, or abandoned hand-drawn animation, but that's never stopped Disney.
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
Brer Panther said:
I highly doubt Walt would fill in the Rivers of America either.

Of course, I also doubt he would've made a live action remake of Snow White, or abandoned hand-drawn animation, but that's never stopped Disney.
Click to expand...
Feels wrong to speculate on what a guy you never knew who died 60 years ago would do with a park he never saw, a today he does not know, and a current fanbase that he would not understand.

Also I think he would have done some live action remakes because he did facilitate plenty of live action remakes of stories :/ defo not at the scale Disney now does them but he would be blind to not see how much that revenue could help the parks.
 
el_super

el_super

Well-Known Member
Disone said:
No excuses except for Walt Disney World is just cheap.
Click to expand...

If you keep expanding the park, and adding attractions, you have to pass those operating costs onto the consumers. They don't want to keep paying more and more in admissions for rides they aren't going to visit/use. That's why attractions with low visitation have to be closed and replaced.
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
el_super said:
If you keep expanding the park, and adding attractions, you have to pass those operating costs onto the consumers. They don't want to keep paying more and more in admissions for rides they aren't going to visit/use. That's why attractions with low visitation have to be closed and replaced.
Click to expand...
You also get the people problem in how much people are going to realistically walk + be able to do in a day. I'm sure there are plenty Gen Public guests who want to be able to do most things in 1 trip because thats all they get. One trip in their lifetime.
 
voodoo321

voodoo321

Well-Known Member
AidenRodriguez731 said:
Feels wrong to speculate on what a guy you never knew who died 60 years ago would do with a park he never saw, a today he does not know, and a current fanbase that he would not understand.

Also I think he would have done some live action remakes because he did facilitate plenty of live action remakes of stories :/ defo not at the scale Disney now does them but he would be blind to not see how much that revenue could help the parks.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but they would've been good. Instead of bad.
 
Disone

Disone

Well-Known Member
el_super said:
If you keep expanding the park, and adding attractions, you have to pass those operating costs onto the consumers. They don't want to keep paying more and more in admissions for rides they aren't going to visit/use. That's why attractions with low visitation have to be closed and replaced.
Click to expand...
When was the last time they expanded a theme park at Walt Disney World?

This totally bogus and untrue. Did Disneyland close rivers of America in order to build galaxies edge. No they did not. They did alter it. They did make it a little bit smaller. But they kept it. Is rivers of America somehow infinitely more popular at Disneyland than it is at Walt Disney World? No. It's not. Fantasmic you say? They have World of color. And Disneyland already has fireworks and when they want to electrical parades. Name me any Disney park in the world that has a nighttime spectacular a firework show and a night parade all in the same evening of the same Park.

Under your logic in order for World showcase to get a new country, Walt Disney World would have to eliminate one of the existing countries. Which I'm sure they're willing to do And there will be so many who would completely justify it just as you have. Morocco wasn't very popular anyway. No one was going to it. In order to afford being able to install (insert name of new country here) , They have to get rid of the lower performing countries first.
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
Brer Panther said:
Which live action remakes did he make? I know he did live action ADAPTATIONS of stories, but what live action REMAKES did he make?
Click to expand...
I mean all of the live action adaptations are pretty much by definition remakes because they're telling the same story in an alternate format. But no, in the relatively short time that he was making movies, he did not make the traditional remake that Disney currently makes.
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
Disone said:
When was the last time they expanded a theme park at Walt Disney World?

This totally bogus and untrue. Did Disneyland close rivers of America in order to build galaxies edge. No they did not. They did alter it. They did make it a little bit smaller. But they kept it. Is rivers of America somehow infinitely more popular at Disneyland than it is at Walt Disney World? No. It's not. Fantasmic you say? They have World of color. And Disneyland already has fireworks and when they want to electrical parades. Name me any Disney park in the world that has a nighttime spectacular a firework show and a night parade all in the same evening of the same Park.

Under your logic in order for World showcase to get a new country, Walt Disney World would have to eliminate one of the existing countries. Which I'm sure they're willing to do And there will be so many who would completely justify it just as you have. Morocco wasn't very popular anyway. No one was going to it. In order to afford being able to install (insert name of new country here) , They have to get rid of the lower performing countries first.
Click to expand...
I love the defense that "what about having no firework show in their main park" is "what about the show in their SECOND PARK????" as if that changes that it would be AFAIK the only castle park without a nighttime show.

Also Monsters Inc is an expansion, Pandora was an expansion, also pretty sure Toy Story Land and Star Wars are both expansions.
 
Jrb1979

Jrb1979

Well-Known Member
AidenRodriguez731 said:
I love the defense that "what about having no firework show in their main park" is "what about the show in their SECOND PARK????" as if that changes that it would be AFAIK the only castle park without a nighttime show.

Also Monsters Inc is an expansion, Pandora was an expansion, also pretty sure Toy Story Land and Star Wars are both expansions.
Click to expand...
Monsters inc is a replacement of Muppets, Pandora was a replacement for Camp Mickey and Star Wars replaced Streets of America. Yeah they were all expansions. 🙄
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
Jrb1979 said:
Monsters inc is a replacement of Muppets, Pandora was a replacement for Camp Mickey and Star Wars replaced Streets of America. Yeah they were all expansions. 🙄
Click to expand...
okay that works if Camp Mickey, Streets of America, and Muppets are the same size as their expansions... they are not. If you originally had 2 acres and you put in a new land in that area that is 4 acres... that's an expansion.
 
surfsupdon

surfsupdon

Well-Known Member
It is frustrating because DL did not lose their RoA for Galaxy's Edge, but we have to lose ours for CarsLand, which is impossible to be as amazing as the headliner and scenery of the original CarsLand.
 
Gusey

Gusey

Well-Known Member
Jrb1979 said:
Monsters inc is a replacement of Muppets, Pandora was a replacement for Camp Mickey and Star Wars replaced Streets of America. Yeah they were all expansions. 🙄
Click to expand...
Monsters Door Coaster is using an expansion plot behind Mama Melroses. Flight of Passage/Navii River Journey are located in the expansion plot that was behind Camp Minnie Mickey. Toy Story Land replaced the costume buildings from the Tram Tour and used up the expansion pad located behind them
 

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

Back
Top Bottom