News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[MisterPenguin]

What rides -- which are in the theme of the attraction -- are some sort of vehicle that we don't drive?

That would be... just about all of them except Millennium Falcon and Speedway.

Do we drive the KS jeep? Do we drive the jeep in the Indy/Dinosaur ride?

Do we drive the log of the log flume? Do we drive any of the coasters? Do we drive the Doom Buggy?

Yes some rides give limited motion control (teacups, spinners going up or down, e.g.).

But we don't drive our ride vehicles almost all the time. Even if they have a steering wheel.

So... what the heck is it with this canard of "We don't drive it!!!"??

 

[DisneyHead123]

What rides -- which are in the theme of the attraction -- some sort of vehicle that we don't drive?

That would be... just about all of them except Millennium Falcon and Speedway.

Do we drive the KS jeep? Do we drive the jeep in the Indy/Dinosaur ride?

Do we drive the log of the log flume? Do we drive any of the coasters? Do we drive the Doom Buggy?

Yes some rides give limited motion control (teacups, spinners going up or down, e.g.).

But we don't drive our ride vehicles almost all the time. Even if they have a steering wheel.

So... what the heck is it with this canard of "We don't drive it!!!"??

My take is - I think people are kinda trying to figure out the point of this ride? And “Well maybe you drive it?!” seemed plausible but then that wasn’t the case.

I loves me some Disney, but I’m really not getting the justification for this ride. It looks like an ambiance killer in a park that relies heavily on ambiance (the whole “People pay Disney prices for Disney and 6 Flags prices for 6 Flags” has a lot to do with the ambiance, after all.) The track looks like a bunch of brown faux dirt in place of the beautiful RoA. Are kids these days even all that into Lightning McQueen? My vehicle obsessed son isn’t particularly interested in him other than the car factor in general. Is a car race ride some amazing new situation that is going to blow us all away? Because riding a car around a track feels like one of the OG theme park experiences, not anything new. Certainly not new and exciting enough to justify bulldozing beautiful, scenic, opening day splendor.

Again, I think people are just searching for the hook here, and not clear on what it’s supposed to be.

 

[James Alucobond]

... You could also just complain about the placement, appearance, IP, and whatnot without invoking largely nonsensical concerns about the vehicles moving on their own like in nearly every other ride ever.

 

[Bullseye1967]

Best ride I ever had was an airboat just south of Orlando, pure fun so I get you

Boggy Creek Airboats?

 

[JoeCamel]

Boggy Creek Airboats?

Wild Florida

 

[Bullseye1967]

Wild Florida

I like that one too, but I think Boggy Creek is my favorite.

 

[Casper Gutman]

... You could also just complain about the placement, appearance, IP, and whatnot without invoking largely nonsensical concerns about the vehicles moving on their own like in nearly every other ride ever.

The point has become obscured by some (disingenuous) interjections. Of course most rides feature vehicles that drive themselves... but usually, the vehicles aren't the entire point. An overwhelming majority of rides at WDW are a variation on a dark ride, which emphasizes storytelling and narrative through complicated, multi-media scene building. A few rides take a different approach - AK's Safari, for instance, relies on live animals for interest. Everything we've seen of Cars indicates it is going to be an outdoor trip through more Disney rockwork. The PR material so far has focused on the ride vehicles themselves, attempting to make the "off-roading" vehicles the focus of interest. I and others are arguing that being driven around a bumpy track isn't a substitute for more conventional dark-ride-esque storytelling. Indy or Dinosaur wouldn't be interesting if they were outside through rockwork, however cunningly devised.

 

[Incomudro]

My take is - I think people are kinda trying to figure out the point of this ride? And “Well maybe you drive it?!” seemed plausible but then that wasn’t the case.

I loves me some Disney, but I’m really not getting the justification for this ride. It looks like an ambiance killer in a park that relies heavily on ambiance (the whole “People pay Disney prices for Disney and 6 Flags prices for 6 Flags” has a lot to do with the ambiance, after all.) The track looks like a bunch of brown faux dirt in place of the beautiful RoA. Are kids these days even all that into Lightning McQueen? My vehicle obsessed son isn’t particularly interested in him other than the car factor in general. Is a car race ride some amazing new situation that is going to blow us all away? Because riding a car around a track feels like one of the OG theme park experiences, not anything new. Certainly not new and exciting enough to justify bulldozing beautiful, scenic, opening day splendor.

Again, I think people are just searching for the hook here, and not clear on what it’s supposed to be.

What I don't get - and I've said this before - is if this ride doesn't feel quick (give the illusion of speed) then how can it feel like a Rally Race?
And they are selling this as a Rallye Race.
Now... They could have marketed this as a scenic off road adventure.
Go all out on the themeing - geysers, water features, tunnels, etc., and have us off road through the American West.
But that's not what they are telling us this is.
So it really confuses me when I see the ride systems they may utilize.
I really wish they planned to keep the river, put Villain's Land behind Big Thunder and give us an off the shelf Cars Land at Hollywood Studios.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

The attraction aims to showcase the great outdoors from a Cars perspective, with guests actively participating in mountain-themed fun. It's comparable to our own activities like cave spelunking or rock climbing, but with Cars; they engage in off-roading and racing instead.

The name "rally race" is likely used for alliteration and marketing purposes, rather than being an exact representation of the experience. The attraction includes terrain changes, onboard audio commentary, and obstacles (sometimes other vehicles) to create an enjoyable experience. While speed is involved, it's not the primary focus. RSR's top speed was only 40 mph during its main race portion. It's also likely to have an indoor portion (though hasn't been confirmed) Chances are good that it'll feature elements seen in Piston Peak cartoon shorts. It's expected to have similar thrill levels to RSR.

 

[GoofGoof]

The point has become obscured by some (disingenuous) interjections. Of course most rides feature vehicles that drive themselves... but usually, the vehicles aren't the entire point. An overwhelming majority of rides at WDW are a variation on a dark ride, which emphasizes storytelling and narrative through complicated, multi-media scene building. A few rides take a different approach - AK's Safari, for instance, relies on live animals for interest. Everything we've seen of Cars indicates it is going to be an outdoor trip through more Disney rockwork. The PR material so far has focused on the ride vehicles themselves, attempting to make the "off-roading" vehicles the focus of interest. I and others are arguing that being driven around a bumpy track isn't a substitute for more conventional dark-ride-esque storytelling. Indy or Dinosaur wouldn't be interesting if they were outside through rockwork, however cunningly devised.

Radiator Springs Racers is a pretty solid ride. Very fun. The ride has some indoor show scenes too but the majority of the ride is an outdoor trip through Disney rock work. The characters in the Cars movies are cars themselves so it probably makes some sense that a cars based ride focuses a lot more on the ride vehicles than most attractions and they would play a major role in the ride itself since they are both ride vehicle and characters. Other characters appearing in the ride will also be vehicles. I assume the ride vehicles themselves will likely be made to look like characters in a cars movie like the artwork below:

So IMHO the ride itself looked at in a vacuum seems like it can work pretty well….at least close to as well as RSR does. If you don’t care for the Cars franchise then it probably won’t have a great appeal but neither would RSR. For fans, especially kids, riding in a cars vehicle from the movies is the attraction.

All that being said, the location of the ride is a terrible idea. It makes zero sense for a Cars based off road race to take place in a 19th century Frontierland. No amount of storytelling is likely to change my opinion there. In addition we lose one of the original sections of MK that fit thematically and was visually appealing. So while it’s entirely possible that the Cars ride will be more entertaining than a trip to Tom Sawyer Island I don’t think the overall change is a positive one.

 

[Incomudro]

The attraction aims to showcase the great outdoors from a Cars perspective, with guests actively participating in mountain-themed fun. It's comparable to our own activities like cave spelunking or rock climbing, but with Cars; they engage in off-roading and racing instead.

The name "rally race" is likely used for alliteration and marketing purposes, rather than being an exact representation of the experience. The attraction includes terrain changes, onboard audio commentary, and obstacles (sometimes other vehicles) to create an enjoyable experience. While speed is involved, it's not the primary focus. RSR's top speed was only 40 mph during its main race portion. It's also likely to have an indoor portion (though hasn't been confirmed) Chances are good that it'll feature elements seen in Piston Peak cartoon shorts. It's expected to have similar thrill levels to RSR.

Then why not "Off Road Adventure?"

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

The flawed logic is that it's still 19th century Frontierland. It isn't. The mention of the Cars attraction being in a vacuum is apt. The same way Tiana's takes place in it's own little universe and century (20th btw). Frontierland is forever changed. Tiana's was the final nail in the coffin. The Cars attraction just lays it to rest. R.I.P. Frontierland.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

Then why not "Off Road Adventure?"

It very well could feature "off road" in the name, if that's the hang up.
I'm expecting "Cars Off-Road Rally Racers" personally.
Though Disney's already hinted at a possible name:

 

[GoofGoof]

The flawed logic is that it's still 19th century Frontierland. It isn't. The mention of the Cars attraction being in a vacuum is apt. The same way Tiana's takes place in it's own little universe and century (20th btw). Frontierland is forever changed. Tiana's was the final nail in the coffin. The Cars attraction just lays it to rest. R.I.P. Frontierland.

I can’t disagree on Tiana at WDW not fitting in Frontierland either. I would have made that area into a mini-New Orleans Square area by adding or converting a restaurant and a few shops on the far end…ignoring the logistics of how that all would fit. At this point maybe they should remove the Frontierland name entirely and just move to a more generic “Inspired by the South West and New Orleans Land”. Too wordy?

 

[Charlie The Chatbox Ghost]

The flawed logic is that it's still 19th century Frontierland. It isn't. The mention of the Cars attraction being in a vacuum is apt. The same way Tiana's takes place in it's own little universe and century (20th btw). Frontierland is forever changed. Tiana's was the final nail in the coffin. The Cars attraction just lays it to rest. R.I.P. Frontierland.

Honestly, Florida’s Frontierland hasn’t had thematic consistency since Splash opened, since Georgia isn’t a part of the Frontier. But Splash at least made sure its exterior appeared western.

The new Frontierland seems to be more focused on wilderness and nature than the Wild West, and honestly, that’s fine. It’s a smart way to pivot the land so it stays relevant since the western genre has been long dead despite how objectively cool it is. I’m still 100% against Cars taking over the RoA but I guess I’m just apathetic about it now since there’s no stopping it.

 

[LittleBuford]

I don’t really care how fun the ride is going to be; I just don’t think the Rivers of America are worth sacrificing for it.

 

[MisterPenguin]

It very well could feature "off road" in the name, if that's the hang up.
I'm expecting "Cars Off-Road Rally Racers" personally.
Though Disney's already hinted at a possible name:

Disney/Pixar™ Piston-Peak-Park Land CARS® Racers: An Off-road Adventure

 

[Bocabear]

The Tall Tale Cafe could have been easily modified to look like Louisiana country/New Orleans Bayou architecture and theming...so after passing through the archway out of Adventurland the River Bend could have been squarely themed to Tiana's World....Big Thunder should have been the New Frontierland's backdrop...Forget Cars completely and create an all new Frontierland, with better theming than the old Frontierland and an additional 2 attractions....
Liberty Square could be more like Sleepy Hollow (if the rumors of HOP going away are true)...then allow CBJ and Diamond Horseshoe to become the transition area to the Louisiana River Delta...
And put Cars in DHS where is squarely belongs....

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The point has become obscured by some (disingenuous) interjections. Of course most rides feature vehicles that drive themselves... but usually, the vehicles aren't the entire point. An overwhelming majority of rides at WDW are a variation on a dark ride, which emphasizes storytelling and narrative through complicated, multi-media scene building. A few rides take a different approach - AK's Safari, for instance, relies on live animals for interest. Everything we've seen of Cars indicates it is going to be an outdoor trip through more Disney rockwork. The PR material so far has focused on the ride vehicles themselves, attempting to make the "off-roading" vehicles the focus of interest. I and others are arguing that being driven around a bumpy track isn't a substitute for more conventional dark-ride-esque storytelling. Indy or Dinosaur wouldn't be interesting if they were outside through rockwork, however cunningly devised.

There are rides whose main purpose are the vehicle, but they are relatively minor like the Main Street Vehicles. The RoA was full of different watercraft navigating the same area that changed your perspective and experience depending upon which one you chose, and I'm not at all opposed to having a scenic trip through a wilderness setting. I think the noise, speed and type of vehicle for this off road trip will be fun to some, but not for others. It would be more visually interesting and beneficial to capacity, if there were multiple kinds of vehicles going through all this...like the river once had.

Side note: The "Cars" branding on this attraction is entirely superfluous and largely irrelevant. The ride they intend to build would be nearly identical in appearance and appeal without it, and only exists to appease a group of morons who can't imagine rides without IP and gift shops. The guests are not so dumb they can't comprehend "car goes fast past mountain" without Pixar's name slapped on the marquee.

 

[Disone]

Well...apparently the masses want and expect more Disney characters, cartoons, movies and songs in Disney parks. This is what's been touted again and again - the "fanatics" here who don't want that are in a minority. The masses also wanted to be able to book LLs in advance just like FP+. The masses wanted a premium LL service like Universal. They also don't like outdated decor.

Disney is indeed giving the people exactly what they want. But you're saying they shouldn't do that? Or are you saying they should do that? I'm confused.

Wow. You're truly drinking the juice if you think every change Disney is currently doing is because that's what the masses want. Some... Maybe but only if it happens to line up with the financials.