MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Agent H]

Except when it comes to giant fountains in the middle of Future World. Those are fine to remove.

I think it has more to do with the cost of replacing the plumbing than taking it out

 

[Mickeytb357]

They'll probably fill in the World Showcase Lagoon at Epcot and put it there.

Let’s not give them ideas…

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

If anything all the armchair imaginnering about how to get to areas back there while leaving the River completely as demonstrates just how convoluted of a task that is. I'm not saying they had to get rid of the river entirely to make use of these spaces beyond the currently existing park, but it certainly does seem that the River would've have to have been changed in some way to create logical (and functional) ways to get into these new areas from a guest perspective.

 

[mickEblu]

If anything all the armchair imaginnering about how to get to areas back there while leaving the River completely as demonstrates just how convoluted of a task that is. I'm not saying they had to get rid of the river entirely to make use of these spaces beyond the currently existing park, but it certainly does seem that the River would've have to have been changed in some way to create logical (and functional) ways to get into these new areas from a guest perspective.

And? Still much cheaper (and less self sabotaging) than completely filling it in and building a Cars Land.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

If anything all the armchair imaginnering about how to get to areas back there while leaving the River completely as demonstrates just how convoluted of a task that is. I'm not saying they had to get rid of the river entirely to make use of these spaces beyond the currently existing park, but it certainly does seem that the River would've have to have been changed in some way to create logical (and functional) ways to get into these new areas from a guest perspective.

They did an excellent job of making everyone happy in California. They know how to do it. That’s what is extra annoying.

 

[aladdin2007]

They did an excellent job of making everyone happy in California. They know how to do it. That’s what is extra annoying.

For some reason they feel its necessary to come in and purge our parks as we knew them, I don't get it. They mucked up Epcots middle, and now they want to destroy that entire quadrant of the Magic Kingdom, meanwhile things that should be getting attention immediately like the ghetto of animation courtyard at the studios, sits and rots. We have a blessing of size Cali doesn't, yet they are on a tear everything down binge here when a lot of it is unnecessary. Meanwhile Disneyland makes changes so much more wisely somehow with what they have. Here its haphazard.

 

[Agent H]

For some reason they feel its necessary to come in and purge our parks as we knew them, I don't get it. They mucked up Epcots middle, and now they want to destroy that entire quadrant of the Magic Kingdom, meanwhile things that should be getting attention immediately like the ghetto of animation courtyard at the studios, sits and rots. We have a blessing of size Cali doesn't, yet they are on a tear everything down binge here when a lot of it is unnecessary. Meanwhile Disneyland makes changes so much more wisely somehow with what they have. Here its haphazard.

Okay first of all I get being upset about these changes but the blessing of size quote is constantly taking out of context it was said before anything was built on property ( well there were a few things but nothing owned by Disney) when they had a blank slate but now a lot of the parks are limited in where they can expand by infrastructure especially Hollywood studios to the point that animation courtyard is the last place they can build something new in that park and even that would take some reworking and don’t say “oh they can just relocate things” that’s probably much easier said than done

 

[lazyboy97o]

Okay first of all I get being upset about these changes but the blessing of size quote is constantly taking out of context it was said before anything was built on property ( well there were a few things but nothing owned by Disney) when they had a blank slate but a lot of the parks are limited in where they can expand by infrastructure especially Hollywood studios to the point that animation courtyard is the last place they can build something new in that park and even that would take some reworking and don’t say “oh they can just relocate things” that’s probably much easier said than done

Most of these so-called limitations are self imposed and the result of poor design.

This thread is in part about relocating a sizable feature in the property-wide water management system. Hoping that a vague claim of technical challenges will cover things isn’t really a strong argument.

 

[Agent H]

Most of these so-called limitations are self imposed and the result of poor design.

This thread is in part about relocating a sizable feature in the property-wide water management system. Hoping that a vague claim of technical challenges will cover things isn’t really a strong argument.

Self-imposed sure I won’t argue with that but I was responding in general to the claim that essentially suggests that they can just make it work with no knowledge of what exactly the situation is and I’m not arguing in favor of cars either at the very least I think they could have chosen a different ip that fits the area better I believe someone suggested sleepy hollow?

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Disney isn't removing the Rivers of America because it's easier than building a path around it.

They're removing because they view it as a waste of space (as so many Disney fans are quick to agree without question).

Disney has gone from removing stores that didn't have a high enough profit margin to retheming lands and reshaping parts of their parks because they don't hit an arbitrary quota.

They're willing to spend billions to remove more of the "park" out of Magic Kingdom Park® because they don't understand their own product, how to manage the land they own or the value of their assets.

 

[Agent H]

Disney isn't removing the Rivers of America because it's easier than building a path around it.

They're removing because they view it as a waste of space (as so many Disney fans are quick to agree without question).

Disney has gone from removing stores that didn't have a high enough profit margin to retheming lands and reshaping parts of their parks because they don't hit an arbitrary quota.

They're willing to spend billions to remove more of the "park" out of Magic Kingdom Park® because they don't understand their own product or the value of their assets.

Where exactly did you hear that? Or are you just assuming the thing that reflects most negatively on Disney

 

[Agent H]

I will repost this here this is more or less what I think happened behind the scenes

I imagine the pitch meeting went something like this the imagineers sit down with vale and Josh and present a really complex reworking of the paths to get people to villains land vale hm this is going to cost my division a lot of money what if we fill in the entire river and get 1 or 2 new attractions out of it josh that’s the brilliant idea I’ve heard in days! And so the imagineer’s walk away depressed with a mandate to replace the rivers of America with 2 new attractions one a e or d ticket the other some type of flat ride of course it must be based on a ip and a super popular one at that so no Pocahontas or anything that actually fits Frontierland and what do they come to why cars of course! (I do not blame the imagineers for any of this)

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Where exactly did you hear that? Or are you just assuming the thing that reflects most negatively on Disney

One of our insiders has said repeatedly that Disney has been wanting to remove this area of the park for decades, as if to imply its current demise was inevitable. Other have talked about the value Disney sees in making the acreage walkable space for crowd control...in the same park with empty restaurant and retail locations.

The Rivers have been dying a slow death for some time. The Canoes and Keelboats are long gone, and Aunt Polly's only ever opens on very rare occasions. The burning settlers cabin hasn't burned in years, and no updates to the show scenes have happened since a tie in with Pocahontas was added in the 90s. This is all in sharp contrast to what happened at Disneyland as part of the construction of Galaxy's Edge.

If you're looking for a quote from Disney like "the Rivers of America sucks and it has to go", you won't get that. They never do that for attraction closures. Publicity announcements are done to hype interest in the new thing. Any true reflection of management's feelings only comes after the departure of staff who can speak freely without repercussion from the company. Their decision to remove RoA speaks for itself and follows their own historical precedent of why things are removed and specifically the contrast with how Disneyland's legacy assets are dealt with vs MK.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

a lot of the parks are limited in where they can expand by infrastructure especially Hollywood studios to the point that animation courtyard is the last place they can build something new in that park

Not at all - plenty of options. They cancelled the parade and cleared out the parade support areas because they planned to build a stars wars attraction there. Then they moved to galaxies edge but it was too late for the parade which never returned.

 

[James Alucobond]

Other have talked about the value Disney sees in making the acreage walkable space for crowd control...in the same park with empty restaurant and retail locations.

There is a difference between having good crowd control and traffic flow versus suitable dining and retail capacity. Not that either should be a problem, but they're not exactly the same issue even if there's a bit of overlap.

 

[Agent H]

One of our insiders has said repeatedly that Disney has been wanting to remove this area of the park for decades, as if to imply its current demise was inevitable. Other have talked about the value Disney sees in making the acreage walkable space for crowd control...in the same park with empty restaurant and retail locations.

The Rivers have been dying a slow death for some time. The Canoes and Keelboats are long gone, and Aunt Polly's only ever opens on very rare occasions. The burning settlers cabin hasn't burned in years, and no updates to the show scenes have happened since a tie in with Pocahontas was added in the 90s. This is all in sharp contrast to what happened at Disneyland as part of the construction of Galaxy's Edge.

If you're looking for a quote from Disney like "the Rivers of America sucks and it has to go", you won't get that. They never do that for attraction closures. Publicity announcements are done to hype interest in the new thing. Any true reflection of management's feelings only comes after the departure of staff who can speak freely without repercussion from the company. Their decision to remove RoA speaks for itself and follows their own historical precedent of why things are removed and specifically the contrast with how Disneyland's legacy assets are dealt with vs MK.

One of our insiders has said repeatedly that Disney has been wanting to remove this area of the park for decades, as if to imply its current demise was inevitable. Other have talked about the value Disney sees in making the acreage walkable space for crowd control...in the same park with empty restaurant and retail locations.

The Rivers have been dying a slow death for some time. The Canoes and Keelboats are long gone, and Aunt Polly's only ever opens on very rare occasions. The burning settlers cabin hasn't burned in years, and no updates to the show scenes have happened since a tie in with Pocahontas was added in the 90s. This is all in sharp contrast to what happened at Disneyland as part of the construction of Galaxy's Edge.

If you're looking for a quote from Disney like "the Rivers of America sucks and it has to go", you won't get that. They never do that for attraction closures. Publicity announcements are done to hype interest in the new thing. Any true reflection of management's feelings only comes after the departure of staff who can speak freely without repercussion from the company. Their decision to remove RoA speaks for itself and follows their own historical precedent of why things are removed and specifically the contrast with how Disneyland's legacy assets are dealt with vs MK.

Okay I believe you that makes sense interestingly DTB said it was pitched for Tokyo at one point but just so you know all the stuff that was removed was done so for separate reasons

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Okay I believe you that makes sense interestingly DTB said it was pitched for Tokyo at one point but just so you know all the stuff that was removed was done so for separate reasons

Correct, a proposal to replace Tokyo's RoA with a Cars Land is another old idea that is now being reworked for Disney World, as are most of the announced projects happening (Villain's Land, Monsters Inc Door Coaster, IJA).

 

[Agent H]

Okay that too but there’s not exactly miles and miles of expansion space available to that park

Not at all - plenty of options. They cancelled the parade and cleared out the parade support areas because they planned to build a stars wars attraction there. Then they moved to galaxies edge but it was too late for the parade which never returned.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

There is a difference between having good crowd control and traffic flow versus suitable dining and retail capacity. Not that either should be a problem, but they're not exactly the same issue even if there's a bit of overlap.

This is true, but it's frustrating how MK's efforts to improve spatial management are often undercut by other things.

 

[Jrb1979]

In terms of Cars, I find it funny how it's ok for Disney to move away from each park having its own theme to a Mish Mash of IP but yet Universal gets hated on for it.