DHS CARS LAND

[doctornick]

But the new film is going to need to make LOTS (350 million?) of money in the box-office for TDO to know a whole land would be as successful as Carsland money wise.

The problem with Monsters Inc compared to Cars is IMHO merchandise. Cars simply makes a crapload in merchandise and it isn't touched by any Disney owned property, not Toy Story and certainly not Monsters Inc. That's not to say that Monsters Inc isn't a worthwhile property that is liked and will move merchandise, but it just won't do so on the scale that Cars does. Hence, why it's understandable for TDO to prefer to spend more square footage on Cars.

I do think there is a place for significant Monsters Inc presence in DHS. And I think it, as a franchise, is a better choice for a theme park than the likes of Up and Wall-E, much as I enjoy those films. If it's just the door coaster, then so be it, but I think it could easily warrant more real estate in DHS.

 

[Turtle]

The problem with Monsters Inc compared to Cars is IMHO merchandise. Cars simply makes a crapload in merchandise and it isn't touched by any Disney owned property, not Toy Story and certainly not Monsters Inc. That's not to say that Monsters Inc isn't a worthwhile property that is liked and will move merchandise, but it just won't do so on the scale that Cars does. Hence, why it's understandable for TDO to prefer to spend more square footage on Cars.

I do think there is a place for significant Monsters Inc presence in DHS. And I think it, as a franchise, is a better choice for a theme park than the likes of Up and Wall-E, much as I enjoy those films. If it's just the door coaster, then so be it, but I think it could easily warrant more real estate in DHS.

but who knows maybe kids will have a random urge to buy monsters toys and abandon cars (i'm joking, i know nothing is gonna happen)

 

[Beholder]

It's quite a commentary on how things have changed when (it seems) the biggest factor in deciding if something gets turned into an attraction is how much merchandise it can move. Thank God all of the "classics" have been built. Not sure HM, SM, or ToT would get built today. I guess this has been a growing practice, but H. Potter really got the momentum going. Seems like this kind of approach would limit/pigeon hole aspects of creative effort. I'm not really arguing it being right or wrong, just making an observation.

 

[marni1971]

Seeing the wonderful work WDI has done with CL in DCA I wonder if they would do dsomething similar with monstropolis instead. After all it wouldn't be a clone and the door coaster could finally be built

The exterior of the door coaster would be nice. Not amazing, but think Crush at WDSP. Lower building with a long and intricately themed line, accessed off Pixar Place. All the factory interiors seen in the film. Then a gravity building directly behind holding the second lift and the majority of the ride, with a facade akin to the factory design seen in TDL.

 

[Spike-in-Berlin]

The problem with Monsters Inc compared to Cars is IMHO merchandise. Cars simply makes a crapload in merchandise and it isn't touched by any Disney owned property, not Toy Story and certainly not Monsters Inc. That's not to say that Monsters Inc isn't a worthwhile property that is liked and will move merchandise, but it just won't do so on the scale that Cars does. Hence, why it's understandable for TDO to prefer to spend more square footage on Cars.

I do think there is a place for significant Monsters Inc presence in DHS. And I think it, as a franchise, is a better choice for a theme park than the likes of Up and Wall-E, much as I enjoy those films. If it's just the door coaster, then so be it, but I think it could easily warrant more real estate in DHS.

Actually I don't think that an entire Monstropolis land bears the same potential as Cars Land. Radiator Springs is a very small village, it's easy to build nearly the entire community as they did in DCA with only a little reduction.
It's not possible to build even a small part of Monstropolis and even if, it wouldn't have the same appeal. We only know very few locations of this city, it's not like Radiator Springs, where you have a lot of unique, locations with a high recognition value. Flos, Luigis Tires, Cozy Cone Motel, Sarges Surplus Hut etc., there are no equivalents to these in Monstropolis. Most of the movie takes place in the gargantuan companys building anyway.
Cars Land has so much more potential that I am absolutely sure we will NEVER see a similar "Monstropolis". Only a ride with a themed surrounding, not more.

 

[Spike-in-Berlin]

It's quite a commentary on how things have changed when (it seems) the biggest factor in deciding if something gets turned into an attraction is how much merchandise it can move. Thank God all of the "classics" have been built. Not sure HM, SM, or ToT would get built today. I guess this has been a growing practice, but H. Potter really got the momentum going. Seems like this kind of approach would limit/pigeon hole aspects of creative effort. I'm not really arguing it being right or wrong, just making an observation.

Actually I would be very glad if they would exploit SM or HM with merchandise the same way they exploit Cars Land. The HM stuff at Leotas Cart is quite a joke compared to other E-Tickets, just as the few articles which are available for SM in the TL arcade.

 

[Timothy_Q]

Actually I don't think that an entire Monstropolis land bears the same potential as Cars Land. Radiator Springs is a very small village, it's easy to build nearly the entire community as they did in DCA with only a little reduction.
It's not possible to build even a small part of Monstropolis and even if, it wouldn't have the same appeal. We only know very few locations of this city, it's not like Radiator Springs, where you have a lot of unique, locations with a high recognition value. Flos, Luigis Tires, Cozy Cone Motel, Sarges Surplus Hut etc., there are no equivalents to these in Monstropolis. Most of the movie takes place in the gargantuan companys building anyway.
Cars Land has so much more potential that I am absolutely sure we will NEVER see a similar "Monstropolis". Only a ride with a themed surrounding, not more.

True.
I vote for a Nomanisan Island from the Incredibles then

 

[BryceM]

Actually I would be very glad if they would exploit SM or HM with merchandise the same way they exploit Cars Land. The HM stuff at Leotas Cart is quite a joke compared to other E-Tickets, just as the few articles which are available for SM in the TL arcade.

I've always wanted a Space Mountain model with the coaster inside and I can take the top and play with it and there would be little fiber-optic stars on the inside.

 

[menamechris]

The exterior of the door coaster would be nice. Not amazing, but think Crush at WDSP. Lower building with a long and intricately themed line, accessed off Pixar Place. All the factory interiors seen in the film. Then a gravity building directly behind holding the second lift and the majority of the ride, with a facade akin to the factory design seen in TDL.

So...out of curiosity - how thrilling would the door coaster be? Are we talking like a Space Mountain, Barnstormer, or something inbetween? I don't think I have ever heard how family friendly the attraction is supposed to be.

 

[Turtle]

So...out of curiosity - how thrilling would the door coaster be? Are we talking like a Space Mountain, Barnstormer, or something inbetween? I don't think I have ever heard how family friendly the attraction is supposed to be.

I'm hoping between Space Mountain and Everest

 

[marni1971]

I'm hoping between Space Mountain and Everest

It didn't look as manic as Everest. I'd hope smoother than the current WDW Space Mountain.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

WDW needs a real coaster. 'nuff with the kiddie and family coasters already.

Thunder is a kiddie coaster, Everest a family coaster. Manta and Dueling Dragons, that's where it's at. Those are fun coasters, up to modern standards. Still relatively tame in comparison to what they build in thrill seeker theme parks.

 

[Timothy_Q]

WDW needs a real coaster. 'nuff with the kiddie and family coasters already.

Thunder is a kiddie coaster, Everest a family coaster. Manta and Dueling Dragons, that's where it's at. Those are fun coasters, up to modern standards. Still relatively tame in comparison to what they build in thrill seeker theme parks.

That is definitely not what WDW needs.

 

[menamechris]

WDW needs a real coaster. 'nuff with the kiddie and family coasters already.

Thunder is a kiddie coaster, Everest a family coaster. Manta and Dueling Dragons, that's where it's at. Those are fun coasters, up to modern standards. Still relatively tame in comparison to what they build in thrill seeker theme parks.

I agree that there definetly needs to be a balance at Disney. It would be very shortsighted to build all family (tame) rides - and then expect families to return once their children reach the age of 10. There is room for each park to have rides families with children of all ages can go on - and then rides that children will look forward to as they get older....

 

[nytimez]

I don't think WDW should be focused purely on thrills... but considering that they haven't even made an attempt at a thrill ride in years, it would be nice to add one to the mix. Especially since we're already getting a new kiddie coaster at MK. A more thrilling coaster would give that a little balance, IMO.

 

[menamechris]

I don't think WDW should be focused purely on thrills... but considering that they haven't even made an attempt at a thrill ride in years, it would be nice to add one to the mix. Especially since we're already getting a new kiddie coaster at MK. A more thrilling coaster would give that a little balance, IMO.

I agree. Avatar would have been the perfect environment and demographic to do this. Given that children will most likely have limited interest, and probably not appreciate the creativity of the area (like much of AK), it is beyond me why Disney wouldn't place a thrill attraction in to compliment the uninspired Soarin 2.0 and boat ride...

 

[lebeau]

Yes, because only very small children enjoy Pirates and Haunted Mansion. Everyone knows that once you hit 10, you just wants to ride coasters.

I enjoy thrill rides. We have a very nice coaster park for which I have a season pass that costs far less than the cost of one day at a Disney park. Point being, I can ride thrill rides at home for a fraction of the cost.

When Disney can successfully marry theme and thrills like Tower of Terror, I am game. But generally speaking, that means sacrificing a bit on the coaster-type thrills. Which is a trade-off I am willing to make. It's the immersion that makes Disney worth travelling to. I've got size and speed in my own backyard, thanks.

 

[menamechris]

Yes, because only very small children enjoy Pirates and Haunted Mansion. Everyone knows that once you hit 10, you just wants to ride coasters.

I enjoy thrill rides. We have a very nice coaster park for which I have a season pass that costs far less than the cost of one day at a Disney park. Point being, I can ride thrill rides at home for a fraction of the cost.

When Disney can successfully marry theme and thrills like Tower of Terror, I am game. But generally speaking, that means sacrificing a bit on the coaster-type thrills. Which is a trade-off I am willing to make. It's the immersion that makes Disney worth travelling to. I've got size and speed in my own backyard, thanks.

Adults enjoy Pirates and Haunted Mansion. Children and teenagers - on average - probably not so much. Those attractions are great because of their details and storytelling - something that goes over the heads of many. The average guest does not find them nearly as spectacular as Disney fans do. The average guest is all about the true E tickets in the parks - that do marry thrill and theme. There is no reason to think that any future thrill attractions created by WDI would be any different.

 

[td1129]

I agree. Avatar would have been the perfect environment and demographic to do this. Given that children will most likely have limited interest, and probably not appreciate the creativity of the area (like much of AK), it is beyond me why Disney wouldn't place a thrill attraction in to compliment the uninspired Soarin 2.0 and boat ride...

You were able to conclude both attractions are "uninspired" based on a blueprint? Wow you're really smart.

 

[menamechris]

You were able to conclude both attractions are "uninspired" based on a blueprint? Wow you're really smart.

Give it a rest...