Just because they did that for Midway Mania doesn't mean they have to put every Pixar property there. Frankly, I don't think it's necessary for more than one Pixar franchise to be represented in order to make DHS Pixar Place "work".
See above. I just think the mindset of "It's Pixar, so it must go in this particular corner of DHS" is unnecessarily constraining. The idea of grouping attractions together because of similar corporate branding is a little too commercial for my tastes, too. Confining Pixar, Marvel, and Lucasfilm to their own designated "regions" in a single park also implies that these properties have some kind of outsider status, and there is no reason that, for instance, Merida can't fit in Fantasyland along with the other princesses. They should coexist with Disney properties where it is appropriate because, in my opinion, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, The Muppets, Monsters, Inc., etc. are very Disneyesque. I would rather see them move away from the whole studio bit in the back half of DHS as much as possible, in favor of a "Hollywood-style Fantasyland" approach. I don't think a DHS Cars Land should have any thematic association with the Pixar Place area. That would undercut the entire design philosophy behind Cars Land in the first place - that is, total immersion into Radiator Springs. Making this land part of the "Pixar Studio" in DHS would jeopardize the entire illusion because the appeal of the land is that you are actually in Radiator Springs, not a studio set. I'm not particularly opposed to the studio approach, but it's not necessary or appropriate for every new attraction that gets built at DHS. Moving forward, if the studio theme gets used at all, I would prefer the approach taken by TSMM or the Disney Animation, where the theme park version of the movie studio is like a magical cartoon factory, rather than what Star Tours 1.0 did (the "hot set" at the entrance).
I would argue that not every movie-themed attraction needs a mini-land around it to justify its existence. Adventureland, Fantasyland, and Frontierland, just to name a few, have cohesive themes not tied to a particular franchise, and they work very well. I realize that building "movie worlds" is all the rage now after WWOHP and Carsland; I don't think every franchise is worthy of that, and that applies to some Pixar properties. I'm not saying that Pixar attractions should be forcibly grafted into existing lands. I'm just making a case for blending standalone attractions based on different franchises that Disney owns into lands with unified themes in cases where these particular franchises don't lend themselves exactly to their own segregated areas of real estate in the parks.
It's true that most Pixar IP would fit best in DHS because the stories, except for Brave, have contemporary settings. If the standard becomes "every Pixar franchise that gets a ride needs to fit a mini-land in this designated area", then that would be too creatively limiting. Some franchises deserve more than a mini-land, and some could support a single ride but not much else. Disney shouldn't have to make all Pixar stuff in DHS border each other geographically. They should just find the best spot that can fit their ideas, regardless of whether it is next to Pixar Place.
This is what I'm talking about. There is no reason to try to make a unified land that encompasses the themes of Star Wars and Indiana Jones. The only thing they have in common is corporate branding. Let's drop the studio conceit and actually give them their own separate fantasy worlds. They are certainly more than deserving of their own immersive areas a la Forbidden Journey (or possibly even entire lands like WWOHP).
A Muppet studio area would work because the Muppet characters are, themselves, performers. (I just want the Muppet Movie Ride to get built. I know it would be fantastic!)
