Brian
Well-Known Member
The whole point of the Disney theme park was to build things that kids and 'old boomers' can both enjoy.I also think that the Disney parks should focus on things kids like more than old boomers.
The whole point of the Disney theme park was to build things that kids and 'old boomers' can both enjoy.I also think that the Disney parks should focus on things kids like more than old boomers.
That crowd response to this reveal was entirely silence with a few notable boos throughout that entire presentation for Cars. There was no clapping. These are Disney's biggest supporters.
That's all that needs to be said about this expansion.
Those were probably factors but I think the biggest one is they see it as an overall waste of space. They see two attractions with limited capacity, mediocre attendance, and no IP using up a lot of space and they want to change that. It makes sense on paper. It just sucks to lose even more of what used to make Disney different.I hate to sound this way but Disney probably views Tom Sawyer Island and Rivers of America as a liability at this point. Between wildlife causing havoc on the island (bears) and people deciding to take a swim in RoA, I can see why Disney wants to get rid of both.
Of course it is. WDW fans are starving for new experiences. So a big well themed e-ticket in magic kingdom is going to kill. That doesn't mean it makes sense, but unfortunately the mindset is take what you can get with the fans.This is going to be a hit, trust me!
I don't think that's at the heart of the issue. I think this a great alternative to radiator springs racer. But like everything it seems, they have no real obligation to maintain thematic integrity. That's what people are mad about. It's just find aspot, and shoehorn it in.but I have never walked in an original Disney park and I am almost 60. I think those who want to keep everything original…I get it….but there has not been an original park since 1956.
It very much feels like Disney saw the reaction dark universe received and said, wait a second, we planned something like that years ago. And decided to green light it. It's like most things Disney does now. Very reactionary instead of leading the way.I took it as a knee jerk reaction. There had to be better options for a Villains land. And yes I am already discounting it. Why? Josh was vague. Does Disney even know what they're doing here yet? It's a commit, an announcement but still feels early days Bluesky to me .
Can't say I'm surprised. It has been pretty evident for a while that the traditional cowboy themeing of Frontierland was going to get phased out.
I hold no special connection to RoA or TSI but I am sad that we will potentially be losing another water feature in the park. I hope that if this is indeed the plan, that they somehow keep a portion of RoA.Those were probably factors but I think the biggest one is they see it as an overall waste of space. They see two attractions with limited capacity, mediocre attendance, and no IP using up a lot of space and they want to change that. It makes sense on paper. It just sucks to lose even more of what used to make Disney different.
It’s not a claim of mutual exclusivity.Maybe if they committed and actually opened one(like Velocicoaster) people could appreciate the attempts or have faith.
The things you post are not mutually exclusive.
I don't want a clone of Radiator Springs Racers or a cars attraction in an American Frontier themed land.
I would find it doubtful for it to be cheaper. Instead of adding capacity you’d be adding and replacing. Other relocation projects haven’t really been of the same scope in terms of how much and how far. But it runs headlong into the bizarre desire among some to remove the Rivers of America.The problem is that there seems to be people within the company that genuinely want the Riverboat, RoA and TSI gone. The desire to perma dock the Riverboat at least has certainly come up in discussion before, I recall Martin stating there were various pushes over the years to do so.
Keep in mind that filling in RoA and creating new retention ponds elsewhere is probably viewed by some in the company as being easier and less cost prohibitive than expanding outside the railroad berm. The RoA already contains a concrete foundation, so the land it's built on top of is already technically more "developed" compared to the expansion pads which is undeveloped swampy land.
Hope that is the case but they did say Cars will be in a “reimagined” part of Frontierland which based on many responses here implies they’re removing something, and that might be the river and island connecting the dots. We shall see though..No way we are losing Rivers of America completely.
This will almost certainly be akin to the Disneyland overhaul. We’ll get a sizable percentage of the island shaved off and the river will be reduced.
Honestly, I’m fine with that. The way they handled it in Disneyland is objectively an improvement on what was there.
Hard disagree. There are no IP-specific lands in Magic Kingdom. They don't belong. And if it's going to happen, please don't start with cars!
No, the back side of water is in Adventureland.This is the back side, right?
This is a good catch. Perfect picture to show perspectiveI’m looking at photos I’ve taken of BTM and it definitely looks like they’re taking out the RoA. This isn’t a shortening, this is a complete replacement.View attachment 808259View attachment 808260
Coco and Encanto for that location.If you’re at liberty to say, what was the alternative? Coco and Villains sounded amazing to me.
Especially since the only parts of current Frontierland they mentioned were Big Thunder, Country Bears, and Tiana’s- TSI is the only attraction left out of that list.Hope that is the case but they did say Cars will be in a “reimagined” part of Frontierland which based on many responses here implies they’re removing something, and that might be the river and island connecting the dots. We shall see though..
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.