News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

SpectreJordan

Well-Known Member
I really hope the Disney finance people decide this is to expensive and dont do it. I like the idea of a cars ride, but not at the expense of losing the Liberty Belle, ROA, and TSI. Also, send Cars to the Studios, and give MK something more fitting theme wise (Doesnt have to be IP Driven).

Most of the new announcements seem like a desperate response to the New Epic Universe Park. Except it is to little, and to late. Iger said that they have known about Epic was coming for around 10 years, and they are just now announcing new stuff. They should have announced this stuff 5 years ago, and had some of this stuff up and running starting this year and into next year.
None of this would compare to a brand-new theme park opening up, even if they were all homeruns. The only way Disney could've competed is with a 5th gate opening up around the same time. It's smarter to open this up a couple years after EU is out.
 

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
That's not the logic of this expansion, though. The proposed design is full of planted areas, full of water and rockwork, and full of decor, often inefficiently so in order to hide the Cars vehicles from the rest of the land.

The comment was addressed (respectfully, I hope,) to another poster, not the Disney company. I was responding to his or her proposed rationale for this change.

My point being - feedback is great. Sensitivity to your audience is great. Even efficiency in usage is good stuff, usually. But those can’t be standalone metrics, because the logical outcome of that is not great. (I think there was a Twilight Zone episode to that effect, where anyone considered “redundant” was just executed on the spot. That would be like the extreme extreme end of that spectrum.)

Balance in all things, right? Feedback is good. Maximizing efficacy is good. Balanced against an understanding that feedback is most useful for complaints, like “Hey, housekeeping has been really inconsistent” and is not a tool for people to take a deep dive into their own psychology to dream up the theme park that would make them happiest, mentally design it, and outline it in detail in a survey response.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Questions I would love to ask Josh D'Amaro:
  • Does Lightning McQueen purchase life insurance or car insurance?
  • The Popemobile appeared in Cars 2, implying the existence of Jesus Christ as an automobile. What make and model was the messiah?
This is why I don't get invited to media events.
The Christler has a bumper sticker that says, "Honk if you love me."
 

Ghost93

Well-Known Member
I'm in the Magic Kingdom today. As I walk around Tom Sawyer Island with my wife and kids, I can't help but think "man this place sucks, I can't wait until they rip it out and build something awesome instead."
I think Tom Sawyer's island is a well themed area of the park, but I acknowledge the reality that the area is completely dead most of the time and that the Tom Sawyer brand isn't relevant to today's kids. Throughout the 20th Century, Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn were taught in almost every school and were known by almost everybody in the general culture. I'm not sure that's the case anymore.

After the announcement that the area was going to be replaced by Cars I looked up modern YouTube videos of the island. Almost no one actually goes there. I did find some videos from the 80s and 90s showing that once upon a time, the island was heavily visited. But it has long outlived its use fo the Disney company.
 

Stripes

Premium Member
I am not sure what Disney has done recently that gives you any sense that this will occur. Also, dissecting the concept art they provide...well, I have learned a lesson or two from that.
I saw how beautifully they integrated Galaxy’s Edge at Disneyland into the surroundings of Frontierland and Critter Country.

Also an insider has chimed in and said:

”It’s hard to see from the art, but there are new ponds, streams, and waterfalls that are being created, so it’s not a total loss of water. There will actually be more kinetic energy with this than there currently is in the area.”

“How to fit Cars into the region is actually very real, as John Lasseter did concepts for the original films going through places like Yellowstone, but were never realized (though the adjacent franchise, Planes Fire & Rescue does take place in a Yellowstone-like national park). There is a lot more to this concept and I think you’ll see some more Cars related IP coming around the bend that will even cement how it makes logical sense being there. This concept is adjacent to National Parks (not inside one) and it is very pretty. I do have doubts about the reliability of it being outdoors in Florida, but that’s besides the point here.

The aesthetics of the land are based on the Grizzly Peak Recreation Area in DCA. (Piston Peak instead of Grizzly Peak) Obviously there are some aesthetic differences and it’s a Cars ride instead of a rapids ride, but that’s a product of the MK having Tiana’s so close and the IP requirement set above.

In the end, there was no way to save the existing river system. The new lands have major elevation changes that can’t be accomplished without altering the river…”
 

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
They could sell the dolls at the Villains Land store
But then where will they sell the Bob Iger dolls?
Cars 2 had a underground parts market where they encounter this car.

1723813919492.png
Here's a thought - maybe they can have the Cars ride be sponsored by Chevron and have the cars from those ads appear alongside Lightning and Mater like Disneyland's Autopia in the 1990s.
That TDO and WDW management has left their Rivers of America to rot for decades now is not the fault of the paying guests who know that, and thus avoid wasting time on a lone riverboat to look at a landscaped drainage canal (my phrase from 2010).
Isn't that basically what they did with Splash Mountain? Go "to heck with maintenance" and let it rot so nobody will have a problem with you tearing it out?
 

Stripes

Premium Member
That quote is very misleading. There was absolutely a way to save a portion of the River like in Disneyland. Anyone can argue the merits of saving it, but it could absolutely be saved.
Anything can happen with enough money. The question is not whether it could’ve been saved but rather was it worth spending 30-40% more on this project to save it, thereby cancelling what could very well become my favorite attraction, and delay the project by a year or more.

I would prefer that the money go towards building another E-ticket and getting this project open as soon as possible. I have a far more beautiful view outside my living room window than what Rivers of America offers at MK. It really is nothing special to me. It doesn’t have the history, the beauty, or the kinetics of the one in Disneyland. And a similar or higher level of serenity can be accomplished in Frontierland and Liberty Square without squandering so much valuable land.
 

McMickeyWorld

Well-Known Member
Growing up the Disney Parks were built on nostalgia. All of that was pushed to way side for flashy IP. It's really sad how Iger and friends view the parks.

At least the Japanese parks understand that still.
I’m not trying to invalidate your feelings, but I don't think it’s a "flashy" IP anymore. I’m Gen Z, and Cars definitely gives me nostalgia; it takes me back to my childhood. It’s not really a new product—it’s almost 20 years old. I don't agree with its placement, but I think a lot of people from my generation are going to feel pretty nostalgic about it.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
Anything can happen with enough money. The question is not whether it could’ve been saved but rather was it worth spending 30-40% more on this project to save it, thereby cancelling what could very well become my favorite attraction, and delay the project by a year or more.
Yes, that can be argued and debated. At Disneyland, they spent considerably more to save the rivers - and I think the park is much better for it.

Why do you think this may be your favorite attraction? No matter where it was going it doesn’t have much interest to me and I think radiator springs racers is one of Disneys best modern attractions, maybe even better than rise.
 

psherman42

Well-Known Member
It can work. The only difference is would they be able to build all the cars land section without having to close the railroad? If they can build and close it prior to starting Villain's which I assume they can then there's basically no questioning why this can't work if all this has to do with closing the railroad later on only when starting Villain's!
Honestly, as disappointing as it would be to have the train close *again for an extended period of time, I’d happily take another closure if it meant they could preserve part of the river.
I saw how beautifully they integrated Galaxy’s Edge at Disneyland into the surroundings of Frontierland and Critter Country.

Also an insider has chimed in and said:

”It’s hard to see from the art, but there are new ponds, streams, and waterfalls that are being created, so it’s not a total loss of water. There will actually be more kinetic energy with this than there currently is in the area.”
If there are all these ponds, streams, and waterfalls supposedly planned for the area, why did they release concept art that doesn’t show them?
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
If there are all these ponds, streams, and waterfalls supposedly planned for the area, why did they release concept art that doesn’t show them?
Uh, because the attractions and Piston Peak in particular are most visible from an eastern aerial vantage point, but the remaining bodies of water will presumably be mostly to the south and west, concealed in the artwork by the physical barriers that encircle the miniland?
 

Stripes

Premium Member
Yes, that can be argued and debated. At Disneyland, they spent considerably more to save the rivers - and I think the park is much better for it.
Disneyland’s Rivers of America hosts the Mark Twain (which on its maiden voyage hosted the 30th wedding anniversary of Walt and Lillian Disney), the Sailing Ship Columbia, and Fantasmic. None of which applies to MK’s ROA and never has. Not to mention, Disneyland’s has always been more aesthetically pleasing.

I’d certainly imagine the costs of saving MK’s version was a lot higher considering the expansions would need to be built on marginally unsuitable or, at best, marginally suitable land. Disneyland didn’t have that problem and their expansion space was all previously developed land. MK’s river is also connected to a very sophisticated water management system, unlike Disneyland’s.

When you consider all of these factors it’s difficult to justify the continued existence of MK’s Rivers of America. I’m glad WDWMagic insiders have shared that Disney executives chose one of the more expensive plans in terms of making sure the expansion fits in well with Frontierland and Liberty Square.
 

Stripes

Premium Member
Why do you think this may be your favorite attraction? No matter where it was going it doesn’t have much interest to me and I think radiator springs racers is one of Disneys best modern attractions, maybe even better than rise.
Indeed, RSR is my favorite attraction. As someone that lives in the PNW, I’m very excited to see that region of our country represented in the parks for the first time. A thrilling race up and down climbing trails, caves, dodging geysers, and splashing in mudholes reportedly using electric cars navigating using trackless technology sounds like a one of a kind attraction with some incredibly innovative technology.

Like I said, RSR is my favorite attraction. I think this one could give it a run for its money.
 
Last edited:

psherman42

Well-Known Member
Disneyland’s Rivers of America hosts the Mark Twain (which on its maiden voyage hosted the 30th wedding anniversary of Walt and Lillian Disney), the Sailing Ship Columbia, and Fantasmic. None of which applies to MK’s ROA and never has. Not to mention, Disneyland’s has always been more aesthetically pleasing.

I’d certainly imagine the costs of saving MK’s version was a lot higher considering the expansions would need to be built on marginally unsuitable or, at best, marginally suitable land. Disneyland didn’t have that problem and their expansion space was all previously developed land. MK’s river is also connected to a very sophisticated water management system, unlike Disneyland’s.

When you consider all of these factors it’s difficult to justify the continued existence of MK’s Rivers of America. I’m glad WDWMagic insiders have shared that Disney executives chose one of the more expensive plans in terms of making sure the expansion fits in well with Frontierland and Liberty Square.
So because it’s “not as aesthetically pleasing” as Disneyland’s, that means it has to go? If Disney wanted to save the river, they could. Aren’t the imagineers supposed to be the best in the business? Are we really supposed to believe they couldn’t come up with some sort of solution, even to preserve the front part of the river along the walkway?
 

Stripes

Premium Member
If there are all these ponds, streams, and waterfalls supposedly planned for the area, why did they release concept art that doesn’t show them?
Probably because they plan to show off concept art that clearly depicts how things will look just before Rivers of America closes. They did the same thing just before Rivers of America was drained in Disneyland.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom