BuzzedPotatoHead89
Well-Known Member
I’d also argue that MMRR is a good attraction in the wrong place (even if it is in the right park). If it went to animation courtyard, no problem. Replacing the thesis statement for DHS - not so much.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
CoasterCowboy67
Well-Known Member
lol what?! This entire thread is people enraged about replacing 2 attractions that aren’t even flat rides with queues (they’re a scenic boat and an island playground) with 2 Cars attractions and 2 “major” attractions in Villains?
How is that not as “bad” (or “good” if you’re a fan of what DLR did) than losing a 3D show, 3 flat rides and a kids train ride?
BTW, the ride that went to Pixar Pier is in a spot another attraction used to be (Maliboomer)
Last edited:
AidenRodriguez731
Active Member
I would argue GMR was one of those rides that was taken out with a two birds, one stone situation. It was maintained not very well, was expensive to replace, and the deals on some of the movies featured were probably costing money so they decided to just take it out. Honestly wonder if they could do a new GMR centered around more traditional Disney IP or bring back Muppets GMR...
October82
Well-Known Member
The RoA and the riverboat are a core part of the thematic cohesion of a good chunk of the MK. That’s what people are talking about losing and very different from anything done at DCA. (Although there are parallels with ToT)
I’d invite you to reread the thread if you think “attraction count” is the relevant point of contention for many people in this thread. That said, the WDW parks probably all need added capacity - which expansion rather than replacement could deliver. People aren’t wrong to point that out even if that isn’t the root problem for Cars in Frontierland.
I’d also be remiss in not pointing out that Villains isn’t going on the RoA plot. It’s Cars that is replacing the RoA - bad faith arguments about operational concerns notwithstanding.
Last edited:
October82
Well-Known Member
GMR is a weird one - it seemed tailor made for a Great Disney Movie Ride redo.
BuzzedPotatoHead89
Well-Known Member
Have you seen Flik’s Fun Fair in comparison to RoA? We’re talking about off the shelf Zamperla carnival spinners here, which while more semi-artfully themed weren’t even opening day attractions that were added during Eisner’s austerity era to boost DCA’s “family ride” count. Not saying AC in its current state is better, just that it’s not likely to be “felt” in terms of park losses.
The problem with losing the river is about the elements of theme park design. And the intentionality of the entire theme and place making of the left side of the park which are purpose-built and designed to be adjacent the large body of water.
Now, as a theme this is not to say WDW’s current Frontierland can’t be improved or even totally razed and I’m actually of the opinion maybe it should be to differentiate the domestic park offerings anyway. But it also could be nothing more than a perverse incentive to add more lightning lane and merchandisable (money generating) attractions at the expense of themed place making.
gorillaball
Well-Known Member
Accountants don’t make decisions like that. If you want to say “Finance” people I’ll let it slide.
CoasterCowboy67
Well-Known Member
The goal post is moving, and even then, there yet to be a coherent argument for something that DLR is doing that WDW isn’t also doing. Whether it’s attraction count, unused in-park space, thematic significance, or expansion pads utilized
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
Not really - you are talking to multiple people about multiple topics.
October82
Well-Known Member
Not at all. I responded to your claim about expansions vs replacements. DLR is mostly planning new attractions on expansion pads. WDW is mostly replacing existing attractions. DLR has done a bit of both in the past - no one is ignoring that. It’s still interesting that the two resorts seem to have different business strategies.
The main arguments in this thread aren’t about that topic. Perhaps there was miscommunication but you seem to have responded to the expansion vs replacement aspect rather than the more substantive part of this thread on thematic cohesion.
In any case, this seems to have run its course. The bottom line for me, and for others, is that WDW deserves a more thorough and thoughtful expansion than it’s getting.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
OK Finance people.
Everyone knows the fights Walt and Roy had. Walt wanted to do stuff and Roy was constantly pushing back about the finances. Lucky for us, Walt won most of those fights.
Today there are no fights. The "Finance people" run the theme parks.
Could you image Roy telling Walt they could save money if they filled in rivers of America! LOL, LOL, LOL.
CoasterCowboy67
Well-Known Member
This is false, as I’ve repeatedly stated. You’re counting Multiverse as an expansion pad and ignoring the many rides at Bugs Land it replaced. Similarly, you count Guardians as a replacement and ignoring the expansion pad Disney utilized for its massive show building.
That is what I mean by the goalpost moving, as the definition of attraction replacement and expansion pad is being used out of convenience to advance a narrative the sky is falling on WDW and DLR is sunshine and rainbows
October82
Well-Known Member
No one is ignoring those things, and even if they were, that’s not moving the goal posts.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
hey, if it makes you feel better I’m extremely disappointed about losing red car trolley - so no Disneyland isn’t getting it right all the time either.
I’m also 100% against mission breakout out there.
CoasterCowboy67
Well-Known Member
Turning the eye to attraction replacements in DLR and use of expansion pads at WDW is 100% a double standard and moving the goal posts
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I liked bugs land better and I liked tower of terror better… what are you talking about?
BuzzedPotatoHead89
Well-Known Member
100% agree on losing red car trolly. It’s another nail in the coffin on losing the DCA theme. And it’s a shame because the park made meaningful progress after 2012.
While I don’t mind having MBO, I’ve always said I’m envious that MK still has CoP, People Mover, and Country Bears (even the new version). So no Disneyland isn’t “always getting it right” in my eyes either.
October82
Well-Known Member
I’d recommend you go back through this conversation. I acknowledged where there are parallels, and afaik, explicitly responded to your points as you made them. I’m happy to discuss more - if there’s a substantive new point - but nowhere did I ignore a point you made or “move the goalposts”. Disagreement doesn’t mean someone is ignoring you or not able to respond to your points.
I feel that I’ve been clear from the beginning but in case not, my point is that DCA is getting three new attractions on previously undeveloped expansion pads. It’s weird that Disney doesn’t seem to be doing the same in Florida - especially when you’ve given recent examples where they (arguably) have done so. There’s seemingly little reason for Cars, Monsters, and Encanto to not be expansions rather than replacements. That’s it.
Centauri Space Station
Well-Known Member
Except DHS got a net gain of 3 new rides on the former area of just 1.
They put attractions and expanded the walkable areas in parts that was formerly non accessible to guests. Backlot was all facades with nothing but a few shops and playground. BLT was a waste of space
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
I don't know what's worse, having MK run on fumes and inertia because Phil Holmes and Jay Rasulo don't want to spend a cent on it, or having a Disney willing to spend billions on new additions, only to throw out the whole park in the process.