News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[lentesta]

You keep trying to silo this and I don’t understand why. A new Cars attraction isn’t going to be rated worse if the Riverboat or Hall of Presidents still exists.

People’s overall assessment of the day may be worse though as a result of poor design.

I prefer to replace Liberty Square with Cars and leave the area north of Big Thunder for another future expansion.

Those moves give us 3 new things (Cars, Villains, and the future land).

The other option seemed to be keeping LS and putting Cars in the area north of Big Thunder. That would give us 2 new things (Cars and Villains).

I think those are really the only two choices we get right now. I mean, sure, we could add more land for more things, but given what we know right now, those are the two choices.

So I value the future of that undeveloped land higher than I value what's in Liberty Square right now. Keeping in mind that the originals of these attractions still exist in Disneyland, I'm super comfortable saying that.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

That being said if they knock the theming out of the park, and this wasn’t attached to a cars ip
Would you be happier ?

The cars ip isn’t the problem as the cars themselves are too modern.

If they could have done a vintage car ride through the frontier / west - place it in the 1920’s to go with Tiana - and then that naturally interacts with the bears and the riverboat - a similar attraction could work well.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Especially when Walt never said that! (I’m happy to be corrected but I don’t believe the quote exists).

What’s funny about the museum claim is that it only makes sense if you’re unfamiliar with museums and Disneyland.

 

[Quietmouse]

I have no problem with change, I just don’t see any reason to remove iconic Disney attractions when there is enough land in Disney World to build three or four more theme parks. Wasn’t that the whole purpose Walt bought all the land? And another thing, Disneyland is much more landlocked and they have never removed their Rivers of America or Riverboat. Even with their land issues, they realize how iconic they are. It really irks me that Disney World, with 44 square miles of space will be the first to remove these iconic attractions and areas. WDW requires big thinking. This is small thinking.

My guess is that Disney world will be the first but wont be the last.

Disney land is very crunch on space, and logically it makes sense for them to do the same thing in order to create new land for attractions.

Again, I just have to imagine the operation expenses of the boat attraction and the island have to be a loss leader for Disney.

 

[Quietmouse]

The cars ip isn’t the problem as the cars themselves are too modern.

If they could have done a vintage car ride through the frontier / west - place it in the 1920’s to go with Tiana - and then that naturally interacts with the bears and the riverboat - a similar attraction could work well.

Isn’t that very interchangeable though?

Again, say frontier land isn’t going to go thru a whole reimagining of the land…this ride itself is very interchangeable to whatever theme you want to apply in the future. Cars is the ip, but the land itself looks western which is the saving Grace in my opinion.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I prefer to replace Liberty Square with Cars and leave the area north of Big Thunder for another future expansion.

Those moves give us 3 new things (Cars, Villains, and the future land).

The other option seemed to be keeping LS and putting Cars in the area north of Big Thunder. That would give us 2 new things (Cars and Villains).

I think those are really the only two choices we get right now. I mean, sure, we could add more land for more things, but given what we know right now, those are the two choices.

So I value the future of that undeveloped land higher than I value what's in Liberty Square right now. Keeping in mind that the originals of these attractions still exist in Disneyland, I'm super comfortable saying that.

These are only the two choices if you accept that the parks have to continue to be poorly designed. That there is simply no way to be more efficient, layer Magic Kingdom with experiences to better utilize its existing (including abandoned) space.

 

[lentesta]

If every attraction achieved perfect score, your grading wouldn’t work. Not every attraction can be the most popular ride in the park. Not every attraction can be a headliner. As mentioned, this particular decision didn’t need to be an either/or.

Disney's doing what it thinks will maximize the money it makes for shareholders over the next 5-ish years.

To your point, there are other ways of approaching these kinds of decisions. And as I said upthread, those discussions are really about what flavor of capitalism you prefer.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Again, I just have to imagine the operation expenses of the boat attraction and the island have to be a loss leader for Disney.

The upkeep of the island is for Fantasmic which is a money maker - as are all night time spectaculars. The most expensive attractions are those with individual guides like Jungle Cruise, Kilimanjaro Safaris, and Storybook Canals - riverboat is not particularly expensive. It’s also usually packed at Disneyland - it’s very popular there.

Isn’t that very interchangeable though?

Sure - I long for the day guardians are ripped out of cosmic rewind and the soundtrack is “universe of energy” - if you can dream it you can do it! Haha

 

[lentesta]

These are only the two choices if you accept that the parks have to continue to be poorly designed. That there is simply no way to be more efficient, layer Magic Kingdom with experiences to better utilize its existing (including abandoned) space.

You know how executives make decisions, man. Present two or three clear choices and give a recommendation. Show the business case in dollars and cents. A well-defined timeline. Have data to back it all up.

I'm 100% with you that the parks could be better designed and better used. I think it's rare to get a quorum of leadership to agree to that kind of approach in a publicly traded company these days.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Disney's doing what it thinks will maximize the money it makes for shareholders over the next 5-ish years.

To your point, there are other ways of approaching these kinds of decisions. And as I said upthread, those discussions are really about what flavor of capitalism you prefer.

They’d make more money with the cheaper project that can be done more quickly.

Disney isn’t run by Vulcans and it is very bizarre that your suddenly pushing a version of the “Disney only makes the best decisions because they have to serve the shareholders” narrative that you’ve previously blown holes in. Disney isn’t above vanity projects and they have had few blow up in their face recently.

 

[MrPromey]

It's not just you. My wife and sister complain about that all the time. Personally I think it's the lack of indoor stuff, so you end up with not enough ac time. Lol

I recall when the park first opened, them having tables with giant sports Thermos dispensers giving out paper cups of cold water just inside the entrance area of Dinoland, in particular.

Foliage hadn't completely grown in everywhere and that area in particular was punishing.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Playin' around with free tools...

 

[lentesta]

They’d make more money with the cheaper project that can be done more quickly.

Disney isn’t run by Vulcans and it is very bizarre that your suddenly pushing a version of the “Disney only makes the best decisions because they have to serve the shareholders” narrative that you’ve previously blown holes in. Disney isn’t above vanity projects and they have had few blow up in their face recently.

I didn't say it's the best decision. I said of the two choices we have, this is the better one.

ETA: I stayed up late for a BBC morning interview, and then I'm off to bed. Have a good night!

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

They’d make more money with the cheaper project that can be done more quickly.

Also with more relevant / recent IP’s. Moana, Encanto, and Coco.

If the #1 goal is to make money and quickly - retheme Tomorrowland speedway to cars with six flags quality.

 

[Jrb1979]

I lament this change from an aesthetics standpoint - I have print on my wall of a photo I took of the steamboat and TSI that I adore - however, the reality is that from a capacity standpoint, that space has been severely limited and underused for an extended period of time. I know that change is hard, the but the bottom line is that MK needs more rides, to provide more capacity, to take the burden off the other attractions. This is a move that will add significant operational capacity to the MK, which will improve the experience for most guests. I will hold out hope that what goes in for Cars attractions maintain some level of theme and cohesion in that area of the park.

Yes it needed more rides, but it's needs filler rides too. Not everything needs to be an E ticket. That's the issue I have with this. You need to Rivers of America and Dumbos of the world as well as the E tickets. Not everything has to have a 3 hour wait in the park.

 

[Quietmouse]

Playin' around with free tools...

View attachment 808959

Call me crazy but the concept art is beautiful for cars land. Super curious how that water fall landscape will look like.

 

[October82]

The only real problematic thing about TSI is how inaccessible it was and how far behind modern safety standards it was

Honestly I think the Island has been doomed for a while purely because of how inaccessible the paths are. I don't think there's a single square foot of sidewalk on that island that is up to ADA standards or capable if handling more than the couple dozen guests the island gets in a day. And generally if one part of something gets updates beyond basic maintenence, then the whole thing needs to be re-inspected and brought up to modern codes for accessibility and for safety.

If I'm right (which admittedly I could be off) then Disney was likely faced with the choice of either entirely redo the island, let it rot taking up half that side of the park and remaining a lawsuit waiting to happen (I've literally found a rusty hatchet in the fort before sitting on a bench), or tear it out and give us an entire new land plus easy access to 2-3 HUGE land sized expansion pads. Tom Sawyer was never long for the world in its current form

I'm just happy the Cars area, despite being Cars, seems focused on exploring a peaceful natural environment full of rock work and water features.

Disney has built several modern and accessible 'adventure areas' - most recently in Shanghai. A tasteful update was more than possible even from current Disney management.

 

[choco choco]

the other thing that grinds my gears (pun intended this time) is just the scale of things these days. this new ride is going to massive. everything is huge and spread out. i would love it if disney gave us a classic darkride scale. you can get the illusion of speed by having things closer to you.

would we be losing our marbles if cars was brought in at a physically smaller scale?

also, also enough with the mini lands. i'm over them

Normally, I'd agree with you (I think everything Disney themes these days is over-scaled) except in this situation. Because, ironically, for here my math shows it might actually be the opposite. By my interpretation of the artwork, Magic Kingdom's Cars Land is about 4.25 acres and will have to include the two full attractions, queue space and themed areas, and walkways. Radiator Springs Racers at California Adventure is its own dedicated 5 acres. I'm actually worried the main Jeep ride is too small. Because they have to fit the other stuff in, there's not enough square footage or boundary space there to really take advantage of the speed and vistas the way the Cars ride in California does.

If so, it would continue a troubling trend Disney has of building of new attractions that are too short in length: just at Magic Kingdom you'll have Tron and the Seven Dwarfs Coaster and Tiana's (the full ride is grandfathered into a previous ride's length, but they really only designed enough content to fill up half the ride); at Animal Kindom they have the Navi Boat Ride; or the Frozen Ever After at Epcot; or the Tokyo's new Tangled Ride.

 

[MrPromey]

can someone connect the dots here - why was coco scrapped from beyond big thunder and why does that equal cars?

If I had to take a guess, I'd say merchandise from Cars is probably more lucrative?

Coco was a rich colorful beautiful movie with a touching original story that was an artistic masterpiece but Disney probably expects to sell more in Mater hats alone in the parks than they'd get from an entire collection themed to Miguel and Pixar's version of Día de Muertos.

That's not even touching on the actual toy cars aspect for die-cast, radio controlled, play-sets, etc.

Although the movies were never a re-watch for my son (born a year after the release of Cars 2) the way others have been for him, my son's favorite "matchbox" style car was a Lightning McQueen I still have with about a quarter of the paint chipped off from all the mileage it got.

For movies that, IMHO, weren't really all that good or original story-wise* they provide infinite merchandising opportunities. Lasseter famously had his own wall of toy cars so I'm pretty sure that is the basis for the company being so enamored with the franchise.

Another thought is that since the movies were more about world-building with vehicles than story, they're also an easy thing to adapt to attractions since you just get in a car and ride around and see stuff and that's all you really need for a concept. You can pretty much go as big or as little as you want from there.

If you think about it, that works with Cars in a way it doesn't with say, a ride based on... Princess and the Frog, for instance.

*largely saved by good voice acting, some comedy and a lot of visual puns

 

[Architectural Guinea Pig]

I lament this change from an aesthetics standpoint - I have print on my wall of a photo I took of the steamboat and TSI that I adore - however, the reality is that from a capacity standpoint, that space has been severely limited and underused for an extended period of time. I know that change is hard, the but the bottom line is that MK needs more rides, to provide more capacity, to take the burden off the other attractions. This is a move that will add significant operational capacity to the MK, which will improve the experience for most guests. I will hold out hope that what goes in for Cars attractions maintain some level of theme and cohesion in that area of the park.

I want to add that Disney paved the way to close Autopia by adding this Car attraction. We could be seeing even more expansion opportunities on the east side of the park, which could include new attractions for Fantasyland, Tomorrowland, and perhaps a new natural water feature... This could all be the start of a real long-term investment into the parks. They obviously had to do some planning on what would replace Autopia, and this is going to be both popular and more environmentally friendly.