News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Bocabear]

Out of curiosity, what changes would you make to update Tom Sawyer's Island, rather than replace it. Bear in mind the massive elephant of the room that is the ADA, so accessibility has to be considered in any construction plans on the island. "The ADA requires that all new construction of places of public accommodation, as well as of "commercial facilities" such as office buildings, be accessible." Tom Sawyer Island is the most inaccessible area of WDW and its closure was inevitable for that sole reason. It was either leave it in disrepair or build something new with access for people with disabilities

Why are those the only two choices? Why not keep it up as a legacy attraction in the park... They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island. Bring back some meaningful food service to Aunt Polly's...which might drive some attendance and get people over to the island to explore again... Most people don't even know what is over there....and it is all pretty great!

 

[Tha Realest]

We're all now discovering that "Beyond Big Thunder" was just code for RoA. Hypothetically, If they did announce a Coco attraction or something themed to American Frontier to replaced RoA, would we still be seeing the same reaction?

Because “Beyond Big Thunder” conjures up a sense of mystery, intrigue, and adventure.

“Adjacent to Big Thunder” doesn’t have the same ring to it.

 

[Gusey]

Why are those the ponly two choices? Why not keep it up as a legacy attraction in the park... They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island. Bring back some meaningful food service to Aunt Polly's...which might drive some attendance and get people over to the island to explore again... Most people don't even know what is over there....and it is all pretty great!

That's the main issue. If they did anything on Tom Sawyer's they'd need to make the whole island ADA accessible, including the rafts to Tom Sawyer's which currently cannot support any kind of wheelchair. A similar thing happened when Toontown in Disneyland got updated, it subtly became more ADA accessible with a longer less steep path under the tunnel, and wheelchair accessible slides at Goofy's

 

[DisneyHead123]

Going to play devil's advocate though and ask, should Disney just be catering to long-term fans and refuse to replace opening day attractions? They need to appeal to all audience, the old and the new, in order to get people to return. I'm not saying that Cars fits into Froniterland, but sometimes some old attractions do need replacing to add something that will appeal to a broader audience

There seems to be this assumption on here recently that casual Disney fans, or younger Disney fans, or newer Disney fans have totally different desires for the parks than “true blue” type fans. This could be true, but I don’t think it should be assumed as a given.

I was talking about “Instagram aesthetics” recently in another comment (you know those hashtag type things you see like “Cottagecore”) and it really made me think about how the internet generation has a unique and pretty strong relationship with visuals. Design trends used to be something that you maybe saw in a book, or in person. Now there are inspiration boards, Pinterest boards, hashtags, photo shoots… I think design is more important than ever and reaches a broader audience than ever before. I think the average visitor probably has higher expectations for the parks than is sometimes assumed. That’s why the Cars thing seems so inexplicable to me - who is the target audience for this? Kids around 7 and under, sure, but they would enjoy it just as much in HS. Who is supposed to be enjoying the immersive experience of Mater in Frontier land though?

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Why are those the ponly two choices? Why not keep it up as a legacy attraction in the park... They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island. Bring back some meaningful food service to Aunt Polly's...which might drive some attendance and get people over to the island to explore again... Most people don't even know what is over there....and it is all pretty great!

Because those are really the only 2 choices that make any financial sense, or utilization of the park sense.

The current version of TSI is underutilized. Disney likely has specific data on this based upon numbers of people taking the rafts per day, but anyone who is at the park can see with there eyes, people are not electing to visit the island, and certainly not in the numbers that other "attractions" are utilized.

So that leaves you with 2 really i guess 3 choices. 1) leave it as is, don't invest time/money in a losing area of the park, and let it just sit there underperforming and costing ROI from lack of utilization in the long run. 2) invest money in turning the island into something people WANT to go see and explore. 3) use the land for something completely new that more people will use and enjoy.

I don't see any logical reason to go with route 1. MK isn't a museum, and the area of land is too big with too much potential to be left as is "for old times sake."

I could see some reasoning behind 2, although i think your going to need major investment in time and money for it to work. The ADA issue is going to be a big one. Your not going to have the same fort/tunnels that you have now. Also i think to truly drive crowds there (i like the food idea, actually I could really see a river side type cafe with seating all along the river in the shade with views looking "in" to the park as being pretty cool....but it would also be a fundamental change from what is there right now) you have to get rid of the raft system and have some form of static ingress/egress to the island (you likely need to do that for the ADA, or completly redesign/replace the rafts to accommodate wheelchairs/scooters, ect.). To be successful you need to have spur of the moment people walking from Tiana and BtRR and seeing lines there and go, hey let me take a quick detour this way. Otherwise unless there is some massive change to the island (and this gets into 3) people don't want to "waste" the time waiting for a raft, getting over to play in a run down fort, and then waiting for a raft to get back.

That leaves us with 3. If people aren't using what is on the island, then you invest money and build something else that people will use. Now I am not going to get into WHAT that should be, at least not here. People can have different opinions on if the choice of what to replace it with is the best one or not. However if your not going to do 1 or 2, all your left with is option 3

 

[Bocabear]

There is a lot more on the island than a "run down fort"...there is a cave to explore, an abandoned mystery mine, a secret escape tunnel... The suspended bridge, the old mill, trails throughtout and up onto the forested hiil... In an age where we keep talking about kids needed a place to run around and explore, there is an island full of exploration...and some really cool stuff to see....

 

[FigmentFan82]

I get it. But I've also never felt the need to visit. So many other things to do and see at MK. I, like many here I think, are more disappointed about the views that will lost as opposed to TSI itself. But I'm also a believer of moving forward and trying new things. Seems like its happening so I guess we all get to see when it opens

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

There is a lot more on the island than a "run down fort"...there is a cave to explore, an abandoned mystery mine, a secret escape tunnel... The suspended bridge, the old mill, trails throughtout and up onto the forested hiil... In an age where we keep talking about kids needed a place to run around and explore, there is an island full of exploration...and some really cool stuff to see....

But there really isn't.

First I don't bring my kids to WDW so that they have a place to run around and explore, nor do I think most parents. Finding activities to do and play that are not screen based is a laudable goal, but its not a theme park. My kids love fishing, hiking, running through nature trails, and do all those things...at home, or near home in county parks/woods that do NOT need a flight to Florida, thousands of dollars in hotel rooms, park tickets, travel costs, or my PTO days.

Second, there isn't some really cool stuff to see on the island. I know that, and WDW knows that, because people AREN"T GOING AND SEE IT. You might personally like it. Heck, I think its ok from a nostalgia point of view, but if most people don't think its worth going to explore....its not cool. Which is the whole point about it being underutilized

 

[lazyboy97o]

That's the main issue. If they did anything on Tom Sawyer's they'd need to make the whole island ADA accessible, including the rafts to Tom Sawyer's which currently cannot support any kind of wheelchair. A similar thing happened when Toontown in Disneyland got updated, it subtly became more ADA accessible with a longer less steep path under the tunnel, and wheelchair accessible slides at Goofy's

It’s not the main issue because that’s not the actual standard.

 

[Gusey]

It’s not the main issue because that’s not the actual standard.

But it should be, especially since the introduction of their 5th key Inclusion (Welcoming and respecting different viewpoints and people. Placed at the heart of all the Keys, it is deeply connected to any of the other Four Keys.)

There is a lot more on the island than a "run down fort"...there is a cave to explore, an abandoned mystery mine, a secret escape tunnel... The suspended bridge, the old mill, trails throughtout and up onto the forested hiil... In an age where we keep talking about kids needed a place to run around and explore, there is an island full of exploration...and some really cool stuff to see....

All of which isn't ADA accessible. If Disney decided to upgrade Tom Sawyer Island, they'd need to add something so people with disabilities could experience the attraction, particularly with the crossing. When they did Adventureland Treehouse at Disneyland, they added the portraits of the rooms at the bottom of the tree so any guests unable to climb could still see the rooms.

All of this is not to say that Cars fits into Frontierland, but that the closure of Tom Sawyer Island was inevitable

 

[lazyboy97o]

But it should be, especially since the introduction of their 5th key Inclusion (Welcoming and respecting different viewpoints and people. Placed at the heart of all the Keys, it is deeply connected to any of the other Four Keys.)

All of which isn't ADA accessible. If Disney decided to upgrade Tom Sawyer Island, they'd need to add something so people with disabilities could experience the attraction, particularly with the crossing. When they did Adventureland Treehouse at Disneyland, they added the portraits of the rooms at the bottom of the tree so any guests unable to climb could still see the rooms.

All of this is not to say that Cars fits into Frontierland, but that the closure of Tom Sawyer Island was inevitable

If you’re not actually familiar with a code, then don’t cite it as a reason.

Should be and must be are not the same.

Disneyland Resort has the alternate experiences because they meet requirements in state law, not federal law. What you conveniently have not pointed out is that Disneyland did increase the accessibility of Tom Sawyer Island. So no, it’s not an inevitable ADA issue.

 

[Gusey]

If you’re not actually familiar with a code, then don’t cite it as a reason.

I did my degree on the ADA so I'm very familiar. Whilst I'm not familiar with Florida specific laws, I do know that disability access is a big issue and something that the ADA tackles, and that it can cause issues with construction.

Disneyland Resort has the alternate experiences because they meet requirements in state law, not federal law. What you conveniently have not pointed out is that Disneyland did increase the accessibility of Tom Sawyer Island. So no, it’s not an inevitable ADA issue.

True, Disneyland's Tom Sawyer does have wheelchair accessible rafts and pathways. The only exception is that at the time Disney was willing to invest in the island as they were tying it into Pirates of the Caribbean. Today, the island at Disneyland is also in a state of disrepair with lots of effects not working. With the island's dwindling population and Disney's obsession for revenue, Disney had to make the decision to either upgrade Magic Kingdom's Tom Sawyer Island, including making it ADA accessible (especially if they reopened Aunt Polly's), leave it to lose popularity again or replace it. They've chosen route 3. I'm just trying to give an alternative viewpoint as to why they're closing Tom Sawyer's Island instead of they wanted to add Cars somewhere and decided Frontierland would do

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

They CAN make some areas of the island ADA if they wanted to, but not the whole island.

I don't know that they would really get the choice to do this. ADA compliance, at least in the last few years, has been pretty all or nothing if they start it.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

MK isn't a museum

I definitely understand why some WDW fans look at Disneyland and think "well why does it get to be and MK doesn't?", but I also think that line of thinking just kinda completely ignores the key differences between the two resorts.

Disneyland has retained much of its history for many reasons, the two most prominent being it was Walt's park and the primary visitor base are people who come often, likely as part of a longstanding family tradition of doing so. The appeal of Disneyland is its history. That's why people love it.

Magic Kingdom is a completely different story.

It started off as Disneyland clone (bigger in size, but arguably reduced in quality) and has gone on to be come the vacation center of the theme park world. It's audience is completely different, feels differently about everything. It's vactioners, people who don't come often, people who don't have longstanding sentimental attachment to really anything in the park, but especially not opening day stuff.

And as such, I really don't think that just because something was there when the park opened that that automatically makes it historically valuable or barred from being touched. Magic Kingdom absolutely has a history of it's own, but it's history is not residing in the attractions it shares with multiple other parks around the world. It resides in what you can only find there, in the things developed for it that offer it a unique identity.

Magic Kingdom just can't, and shouldn't, operate the way Disneyland does. I know that hardcore Disney fans, especially the ones who are WDW natives, think it should but it just can't. We all have to remember that we're a very small drop in the ocean of the amount of people who're visiting Magic Kingdom and what we want or like or dislike is nowhere close to what the average visitor may think or want. They can't just cater to us.

I don't think Cars belongs in Frontierland. I've been open about that since this was announced. That is my issue. Rivers of America going away? Not so much. It holds next to no historical significance to Magic Kingdom and holds very little importance to the park today beyond a nice view which is not, despite what some people want to say, guaranteed to go away just change.

Opening day attractions absolutely should not get special treatment at Magic Kingdom unless they're the original version or the only remaining version. If it doesn't fit one or both of those criteria, then it should be just as much an option for closure and redevelopment as anything else.

It may hurt to see some stuff you love go, and I totally empathize. I'm sure I'll have to say goodbye to stuff I really love in the park sooner rather than later. But the way I see it, it's more positive for the park in the long run. Magic Kingdom can continue to progress and find more of itself rather than just being a Disneyland derivative stacked to the gills with clones and experiences you can have other places.

 

[FettFan]

Out of curiosity, what changes would you make to update Tom Sawyer's Island, rather than replace it. Bear in mind the massive elephant of the room that is the ADA, so accessibility has to be considered in any construction plans on the island. "The ADA requires that all new construction of places of public accommodation, as well as of "commercial facilities" such as office buildings, be accessible." Tom Sawyer Island is the most inaccessible area of WDW and its closure was inevitable for that sole reason. It was either leave it in disrepair or build something new with access for people with disabilities

Build another drawbridge to open access to TSI, but can open to allow the Liberty Belle to pass.
It’ll be easier this time, since you won’t need to put train tracks on it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I did my degree on the ADA so I'm very familiar. Whilst I'm not familiar with Florida specific laws, I do know that disability access is a big issue and something that the ADA tackles, and that it can cause issues with construction.

True, Disneyland's Tom Sawyer does have wheelchair accessible rafts and pathways. The only exception is that at the time Disney was willing to invest in the island as they were tying it into Pirates of the Caribbean. Today, the island at Disneyland is also in a state of disrepair with lots of effects not working. With the island's dwindling population and Disney's obsession for revenue, Disney had to make the decision to either upgrade Magic Kingdom's Tom Sawyer Island, including making it ADA accessible (especially if they reopened Aunt Polly's), leave it to lose popularity again or replace it. They've chosen route 3. I'm just trying to give an alternative viewpoint as to why they're closing Tom Sawyer's Island instead of they wanted to add Cars somewhere and decided Frontierland would do

So you knew there wasn’t a requirement to update everything if something else was updated?

You are not offering a different viewpoint. Every time Disney makes a controversial decision in the parks someone almost always tries to claim it’s due to codes.

 

[HauntedPirate]

I can sum up my feelings on this particular topic thusly:

There was a lot of thought put into the design of MK. This project seems to have the polar opposite.

 

[Streetway]

I definitely understand why some WDW fans look at Disneyland and think "well why does it get to be and MK doesn't?", but I also think that line of thinking just kinda completely ignores the key differences between the two resorts.

Disneyland has retained much of its history for many reasons, the two most prominent being it was Walt's park and the primary visitor base are people who come often, likely as part of a longstanding family tradition of doing so. The appeal of Disneyland is its history. That's why people love it.

Magic Kingdom is a completely different story.

It started off as Disneyland clone (bigger in size, but arguably reduced in quality) and has gone on to be come the vacation center of the theme park world. It's audience is completely different, feels differently about everything. It's vactioners, people who don't come often, people who don't have longstanding sentimental attachment to really anything in the park, but especially not opening day stuff.

And as such, I really don't think that just because something was there when the park opened that that automatically makes it historically valuable or barred from being touched. Magic Kingdom absolutely has a history of it's own, but it's history is not residing in the attractions it shares with multiple other parks around the world. It resides in what you can only find there, in the things developed for it that offer it a unique identity.

Magic Kingdom just can't, and shouldn't, operate the way Disneyland does. I know that hardcore Disney fans, especially the ones who are WDW natives, think it should but it just can't. We all have to remember that we're a very small drop in the ocean of the amount of people who're visiting Magic Kingdom and what we want or like or dislike is nowhere close to what the average visitor may think or want. They can't just cater to us.

I don't think Cars belongs in Frontierland. I've been open about that since this was announced. That is my issue. Rivers of America going away? Not so much. It holds next to no historical significance to Magic Kingdom and holds very little importance to the park today beyond a nice view which is not, despite what some people want to say, guaranteed to go away just change.

Opening day attractions absolutely should not get special treatment at Magic Kingdom unless they're the original version or the only remaining version. If it doesn't fit one or both of those criteria, then it should be just as much an option for closure and redevelopment as anything else.

It may hurt to see some stuff you love go, and I totally empathize. I'm sure I'll have to say goodbye to stuff I really love in the park sooner rather than later. But the way I see it, it's more positive for the park in the long run. Magic Kingdom can continue to progress and find more of itself rather than just being a Disneyland derivative stacked to the gills with clones and experiences you can have other places.

I 100% agree with you, it’s a thoughtful sentiment. We love the parks, but at wdw wr aren’t the majority of guests. The parks need to change for what people like and want, and unfortunately that goes at odds of what we want sometimes. And that’s ok, as sad as it is. I feel like at wdw, we need to decide what’s SUPER DUPER important for us to fight for.
And for the, people are saying “cars is killing the soul of the magic kingdom”. But if im being honest, has magic kingdom ever had a soul that isn’t just “stuff from disneyland but bigger and without the handmade charm and quality of the originals?” That’s been the sentiment among fans for years. “Oh Disneyland is better. Magic kingdom is worse”. Magic kingdom, from conception, has been just similar to Disneyland. Alot of the stuff is just the worst one out of all of them too. Even the river, which is at many castle parks, has never evolved like any of the other ones. It’s stuck in 1971. Id argue magic kingdom has been needing to find its own voice for years. I feel it has been over time with Tomorrowland 94 (rip), and now in modern times, new fantasyland, Disney starlight, happily ever after. And as much as it sucks for the river to be gone, it was never anything special about it from the others. And yes while I’d rather have it stay, maybe it’s for the best for a park screaming for capacity. And also, we should caution against trying to keep stuff like Disneyland for the sake of it, even If the stuff is good at Disneyland. Its a very old case, but Guests did that with pirates, and Yknow what we got? The worst version in the world, and we missed out on WRE. We are getting villains land too, so it’s not a totally raw deal.
I agree it sucks to lose ROA, and cars is kinda questionable, but magic kingdom needs to find its own voice. And this may be a necessary sacrifice for it. People are saying magic kingdom is losing its history and soul, but I disagree. Because if you want to find the true heart of the magic kingdom with its true classic originals, you still can mozy on down to grizzly hall to catch a show, or race down to starport 75 to take a flight.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

Great to see someone thinking the same as I am thinking. I remember Walt on one of the Sunday shows telling us about the Florida Project. There is enough space to add to all their thoughts and desires in the future. Instead of removing an attraction they have the space to add attractions. Yes, they show a Villain's Land beyond Thunder Mountain, a cars land can go there also. Keep the Rivers of America and Tom Sawyer Island. It is a shame that current management is all about eliminating attractions to add attractions.

Reposting this from the Monsters Inc thread, but I think it's more appropriate here. I unearthed the hidden second part of Walt's quote about the Florida project.

"Here we have the blessing of size. There's enough land here to hold all the ideas and plans we can possibly imagine, at least until we decide it's easier to replace existing attractions than build new attractions. It's really hard to make the land in Florida suitable for building (I don't know why I picked this swampland anyway), so you have to understand that when I'm talking about the blessing of size, I'm only talking about places where we've already built things. There's so much space we can fill if we get rid of things that already exist!"
- Walt Disney

 

[Streetway]

Here we have the blessing of size.

Good grief, the comedian’s a bear!