MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

Chef idea Mickey`=

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
aladdin2007 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think it's cheaper for them to just retheme existing areas. I don't see how lowering less for the park is a win win unless you basically get the due back by paid Lightning Lanes attractions. Remember River's of America,, Liberty Bell and Muppets 3D are easy walk on attractions which is essential each every park has! However that doesn't help with the capacity, I think it brings even more congestion, more crowds but they don't care because they'll have more money. So pretending to open a circular route around access to Haunted Mansion and Big Thunder to help draw capacity is not the reason.
 
Agent H

Agent H

Well-Known Member
Jrb1979 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I have never heard anyone complain about universal like that if they do it’s because of the bad studios park
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
TrainsOfDisney said:
The original Disneyland was and is a mash of lands - not one consistent theme.
Click to expand...

Disneyland is also executed superbly. Disney theme parks have become more hodge podgey over the years as IP has become the focus. In the process their themes have been watered down. Walt nailed it with Disneyland with all the different broadly themed lands all kind of tied together by Americana. We don’t view Disneyland as a hodge podge for this reason and because it’s the one that started it all. It’s when you have these theme parks with more specific themes and a bunch of Single IP lands that makes them feel hodge podgey.
 
Agent H

Agent H

Well-Known Member
For me it depends on the context most of time it’s fine but a bad example of the ip mandate would be practically any Tomorrowland cars in Frontierland or current Universal Studios Florida
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
I think much of the fandom including myself has moved on and accepted the fact that all new attractions will pretty much be based on IP. Unfortunately we have newer imagineers who are trying to split the difference by giving us original attractions based on IP which I believe is counterintuitive and need to be executed flawlessly to work. Original Star Tours vs Tiana’s Bayou Adventure. I don’t think the newer imagineers have the chops to take on the task of surpassing and circumventing fans expectations of “original” attractions based on IP while also integrating enough of what people love about said IP.

I think the goalpost has moved from wanting (at least some) original attractions to us just wanting the IP attractions to mesh well with the land/ park that it’s in. Maybe we’ll all get used to this kind of non sense one day. Hope not becasue doing things like removing an integral quadrant of the park and replacing it with a Cars ride is damaging and just something that can’t be reversed.
 
Last edited:
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Agent H said:
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?
Click to expand...
But the opposite is no better. There’s a long tendency in the fan community to just assume and perpetuate claims of technical challenges that don’t exist. For years people claimed Disney had to keep the giant Hat in front of the Chinese Theater. There’s probably no better example than the stories of the yeti being structurally deficient and inaccessible, a situation that would be incredibly dangerous, but makes people feel better about the situation instead of Disney choosing to leave the effect turned off. There are varying degrees of difficultly but the bigger obstacles are more often about the organization itself than the actual technical challenges. We’re talking about a company that recently built a water focused area on top of a basement in Florida.

James Alucobond said:
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.
Click to expand...
There isn’t a difference. Dining and retail in particular are part of the guest space. They give people somewhere to go besides walkways.
 
Agent H

Agent H

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
But the opposite is no better. There’s a long tendency in the fan community to just assume and perpetuate claims of technical challenges that don’t exist. For years people claimed Disney had to keep the giant Hat in front of the Chinese Theater. There’s probably no better example than the stories of the yeti being structurally deficient and inaccessible, a situation that would be incredibly dangerous, but makes people feel better about the situation instead of Disney choosing to leave the effect turned off. There are varying degrees of difficultly but the bigger obstacles are more often about the organization itself than the actual technical challenges. We’re talking about a company that recently built a water focused area on top of a basement in Florida.
Click to expand...
Really they said that about the hat? And even I fell for the yeti thing until recently
 
Agent H

Agent H

Well-Known Member
JD80 said:
Tomorrowland sucks and it's not because of IP.
Click to expand...
Yeah it’s my least favorite land in the magic kingdom and definitely needs work I don’t roll my eyes every time they build something based on ip I’m not like that about it far from it actually but it’s not always cohesive
 
Chef idea Mickey`=

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
How would one theme park be just one theme? Original Epcot I suppose is the "only" one that could do that, but yet World Showcase and Future World are two separate experiences. Celestial Park is one theme and the park is called Universe with different Universes so not all different planets or universes are the same!
Jrb1979 said:
Just read some of the comments in the Epic Universe thread. There is a few there that complain about Epic being a Mish Mash of IP lands and not one theme to the park.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
LindseyDisney

LindseyDisney

Member
My biggest grievance is why Disney has to close an attraction or spot and replace it with something new. Couldn't we live in a world where the Great Movie Ride and Mickey's Runaway Railway both exist in Hollywood Studios? My thinking is that the Rivers of America would look great next to the Cars attraction. I don't understand why they couldn't do both and expand Adventure land.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom