News 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

[BlakeW39]

I find it remarkable that every time Disney announces a new project, they promise the world but fail to deliver. And every time, long-term fans who have seen this charade countless times, set their expectations at the moon and stick their fingers in their ears when they are reminded of how things like this have ended up in the past.

I will be pleasantly surprised if DAK Indy ends up being better than DL Indy. It definitely SHOULD be, but it's not exactly likely based on Disney's track record. I don't think the Indy IP should be in DAK to begin with, because it as a franchise flat-out does not deal with the same core themes or ideas that DAK does. And there shouldn't have to be some sort of contrived, contorted story treatment to "make it" fit. But the "IP mandate" makes it so that Indy is literally as good as we can get at this point. Otherwise they'll come up with something even dumber lol.

 

[Epcot81Fan]

I find it remarkable that every time Disney announces a new project, they promise the world but fail to deliver. And every time, long-term fans who have seen this charade countless times, set their expectations at the moon and stick their fingers in their ears when they are reminded of how things like this have ended up in the past.

Apparently you have forgotten:

 

[mattpeto]

Why not? Their recent track record doesn't exactly fill one with confidence.

I find it remarkable that every time Disney announces a new project, they promise the world but fail to deliver. And every time, long-term fans who have seen this charade countless times, set their expectations at the moon and stick their fingers in their ears when they are reminded of how things like this have ended up in the past.

I will be pleasantly surprised if DAK Indy ends up being better than DL Indy. It definitely SHOULD be, but it's not exactly likely based on Disney's track record. I don't think the Indy IP should be in DAK to begin with, because it as a franchise flat-out does not deal with the same core themes or ideas that DAK does. And there shouldn't have to be some sort of contrived, contorted story treatment to "make it" fit. But the "IP mandate" makes it so that Indy is literally as good as we can get at this point. Otherwise they'll come up with something even dumber lol.

I don't agree. They might get some park aesthetics/design wrong (Communicore), but they seem to have a good pulse on attractions.

Guardians and Tron are well liked, and to some their favorite attractions at WDW. Remy's added capacity and the back part of France is gorgeous. Starcruiser was a failed experiment, but anyone that played the expensive game seemed to really enjoy it.

And putting the maintenance issues aside, I think Rise of the Resistance is an absolute masterpiece. Several animatronics, excellent and engaging pre-shows, interactive cast members, fun story, thrilling ride/drop, safe for the family.

 

[BlakeW39]

I don't agree. They might get some park aesthetics/design wrong (Communicore), but they seem to have a good pulse on attractions.

Guardians and Tron are well liked, and to some their favorite attractions at WDW. Remy's added capacity and the back part of France is gorgeous. Starcruiser was a failed experiment, but anyone that played the expensive game seemed to really enjoy it.

And putting the maintenance issues aside, I think Rise of the Resistance is an absolute masterpiece. Several animatronics, excellent and engaging pre-shows, interactive cast members, fun story, thrilling ride/drop, safe for the family.

I suppose that is all subjective but I think their attractions have been mostly mediocre or even poor over the last decade. Rat is a basically a Universal-tier screens ride, no better than something like Transformers and vastly inferior to Spider-Man which is over 20 years older than Rat is. MMRR is better than Rat in my opinion but still has no interesting sets and is inferior to Na'Vi, which is itself mediocre.

Tron is honestly just a pretty poor rollercoaster, as someone who likes coasters it just has a boring lay out and an extremely short length to boot. It having high waits doesn't make it good, as it's literally the first E-ticket added to that park in like 30 years. The only good thing about it in my opinion is the queue, but the ride itself is boring after the launch. The Millenium Falcon ride is also mediocre to me, and I think all of Toy Story Land pretty much speaks for itself. Now Guardians and Rise are both good, but I think they are also both somewhat overrated. I don't think Rise for instance is as good as the classic dark rides in terms of depth or detail. It just has better production value and an ambitious scope. And I don't think Guardians is as good as Hagrid's.

But I think what's more relevant here is Disney's history of rethemes. When have they been an improvement over their predecessors? Guardians I'll give you, but MMRR, Tiana, Mission: Space, Nemo, JIYI, Test Track 2.0, Pooh, and so on... all downgrades. And Frozen remains arguable, not because it is itself a good attraction but because Maelstrom wasn't (as some argue). How is one supposed to have faith that Indy will be an improvement over Dinosaur (in its prime), when that isn't what Disney has traditionally accomplished with rethemes?

 

[celluloid]

100%. Disneyland's Temple facade is miniscule by comparison, if not completely hidden from Adventure land, and no one ever complains there. I wonder why

Because 30 years ago, they built an amazing original ride. It was another E ticket in Disneyland just six years after another major Baxter E Ticket opened from Imagineering which opened two years after the most famous and most groundbreaking theme park motion simulator of the time as an E ticket. All while there was about to be a new theme park (granted its DCA) next door. So there was a lot going on and still a lot going on for guests. The Scale of TDS and AKL are also very different.


I reiterate...the temple is not the only thing from the updated concept downsized.


There have even been some delays now.

 

[BlakeW39]

I reiterate...the temple is not the only thing from the updated concept downsized.

Could you by chance elaborate?

 

[celluloid]

Could you by chance elaborate?

I did pages ago and that is what started this. I will not go into again because I was name called, told I was being vague etc. Check your Private Messages. I only know what I know.

 

[BlakeW39]

I did pages ago and that is what started this. I will not go into again because I was name called, told I was being vague etc. Check your Private Messages. I only know what I know.

Sorry to hear that. For what it's worth, they respond to everyone like that. I just had one of them DM me calling me a tool who isn't smart enough to understand him, simply because I used a laugh react on one of his posts. Lol. Defenders will defend. Disney could shovel into their mouths and they'd call it chocolate ice cream. I don't plan on modifying my behavior because of them.

 

[Streetway]

I think people are wildly overreacting about this downsizing. People are way too spooked about everything

 

[Brer Panther]

I don't think the Indy IP should be in DAK to begin with, because it as a franchise flat-out does not deal with the same core themes or ideas that DAK does. And there shouldn't have to be some sort of contrived, contorted story treatment to "make it" fit. But the "IP mandate" makes it so that Indy is literally as good as we can get at this point.

Y'know how they decided to have Tiana's Bayou Adventure involve a salt mine (which is never brought up in the ride itself) just to quell all those "why is there a mountain in the middle of the Louisiana bayou?" complaints? The claims that the Indiana Jones and Encanto rides might be about animals (key word: MIGHT) feel like that.

 

[BrianLo]

But I think what's more relevant here is Disney's history of rethemes. When have they been an improvement over their predecessors? Guardians I'll give you, but MMRR, Tiana, Mission: Space, Nemo, JIYI, Test Track 2.0, Pooh, and so on... all downgrades. And Frozen remains arguable, not because it is itself a good attraction but because Maelstrom wasn't (as some argue). How is one supposed to have faith that Indy will be an improvement over Dinosaur (in its prime), when that isn't what Disney has traditionally accomplished with rethemes?

To be fair, some of this is ancient history, done under a different executive leadership with likely some of the creative staff now dead and certainly many of them retired.

Soaring around the World, Star Tours 2.0, Mission Breakout, Sindbad (from a thematic lens), Nemo Seariders (TDS), Test Track 2.0, Disneyland Snow White (from a thematic lens) and Frozen Ever After. In addition to Tiana. I’m sure I’m forgetting some things. (Edit - Pixar Pier!) I probably wouldn’t equate outright replacements to rethemes.

It’s uneven, for sure. But generally the trend line feels like if something actually needed a retheme due to underperformance, it actually might have been an improvement. If something was actually a rather good attraction to begin with (looking at you Splash), it was quite impossible to live up to that expectancy.

I’d equate Dinosaur far more to ToT -> Mission Breakout, myself. I’m sure people will take that one of two ways, which is likely what we’ll see here. If you are in the Indy is infinitely superior to Dinosaur camp to begin with, it’s going to be hard to see this as a downgrade. But if you love Dinosaur, I think you won’t be happy. Unlike Splash, actual GSATs suggest most people will feel the former.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I’d equate Dinosaur far more to ToT -> Mission Breakout, myself.

For me, not even close. The Mission Breakout theme messes up theme and sight lines for the entire park. This retheme, if we get something close to the model, will actually make exterior of the attraction fit the rest of the park better.

I’m sure people will take that one of two ways, which is likely what we’ll see here. If you are in the Indy is infinitely superior to Dinosaur camp to begin with, it’s going to be hard to see this as a downgrade. But if you love Dinosaur, I think you won’t be happy.

It’s both…. Indy in Cali is infinitely superior but we aren’t getting that. Dinosaur is a fun concept and Dr. Seeker has become a fan favorite - if the ride was properly maintained and plussed it’s certainly worthy of staying.

I’m pretty neutral, I don’t have a problem with Indy in DAK since it does fit the theme of exploration - I don’t think it’s a huge win or loss.

 

[BrianLo]

For me, not even close. The Mission Breakout theme messes up theme and sight lines for the entire park. This retheme, if we get something close to the model, will actually make exterior of the attraction fit the rest of the park better.

Sorry, you misunderstand me. Not in terms of final product, but in terms of need/justification. DCAs tower of terror was clearly lesser than and there were multiple examples of superior versions of that attraction. At both DHS and TDS. It also occurred quite recently.

Dinosaur is the same way. There are two much better received versions of that ride already. It’s not meeting Disney’s expectations.

I highly doubt this facade change will be controversial, as you say. Which is already a positive in this projects column.

It’s both…. Indy in Cali is infinitely superior but we aren’t getting that. Dinosaur is a fun concept and Dr. Seeker has become a fan favorite - if the ride was properly maintained and plussed it’s certainly worthy of staying.

I’m pretty neutral, I don’t have a problem with Indy in DAK since it does fit the theme of exploration - I don’t think it’s a huge win or loss.

This technically doesn’t need to be better than Disneyland or TDS to be a success, it just needs to be better than Dinosaur currently is. Though I’d certainly hope it’s not inferior to the other Indy’s. I also agree, the existing attraction could have also just been improved, albeit Indy makes more sense for what they are doing to the rest of the land now.

I’m just trying to break that Tiana is not a good comparator. That project had a completely different ‘reason’ that we certainly don’t need to relitigate.

I just really don’t like Dinosaur in its current iteration, so it’s going go be hard to disappoint me on this one. I don’t think many people think Tropical Americas in totality will be a downgrade from Dinoland USA at least!

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I don’t think many people think Tropical Americas in totality will be a downgrade from Dinoland USA at least!

Agreed - DAK is the only park that has clear wins and improvements. Pandora is certainly better than Camp Minnie Mickey, and this will certainly be better than Dinoland as a whole.

I was hoping they could have saved the dig site even if it became an Indy theme. That’s really the only loss here.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

It’s not meeting Disney’s expectations.

Only if "Disney's expectations" means it needs to be based on a profitable IP. Quality-wise, if Disney were maintaining it, it would be the best ride in the park, as it used to be.

It's still going to be a jeep-shaking ride in the corner of the park. This won't move the needle long-term. It's an unnecessary change. It's just cheaper than doing something completely new and gets another IP in the park. That's it.

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

I realize that I don’t understand all the complicated business factors, but just from the outside, I can’t help thinking:

(a) Disney wants to have attractions that people want to repeat and to tell their friends are “must-dos” thus encouraging attendance

and

(b) The bar for the above is set higher as a result of stronger competition Universal

and

(c) Disney has supposedly allotted $17 billion towards WDW capital expenditures for the next decade

…so…

If they’re having trouble delivering on their original intent with the budget they originally set, wouldn’t it be at least plausible for them to consider increasing the Tropical Americas / IJA budget to compensate for this (and thus prevent them from disappointing guests and being compared unfavorably to Universal’s new offerings)? Like, wasn’t that sort-of the point of the $17 billion plan?

 

[BrianLo]

Only if "Disney's expectations" means it needs to be based on a profitable IP. Quality-wise, if Disney were maintaining it, it would be the best ride in the park, as it used to be.

It's still going to be a jeep-shaking ride in the corner of the park. This won't move the needle long-term. It's an unnecessary change. It's just cheaper than doing something completely new and gets another IP in the park. That's it.

It’s not a maintenance issue. The ride simply doesn’t connect with the public in its current form. It’s like pre-overhaul Sindbad.

Objectively, everything under the hood should work. I’d be quite happy with a soundtrack, better lighting and a complete story tonal shift. But, it definitely needs something. That’s what I mean by Disney’s expectations, it’s just not clicking for how major of a ride it should be - and there’s plenty of internal data on this.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

there’s plenty of internal data on this

I'd love to see that data. Because I'm so far on the other side of this, I can't even see you! I still don't think changing the theme of the ride is going to change the popularity long-term. Like I've said before, there will be a temporary "new ride" bump, but the most important thing the new ride has going for it is its proximity to the new Encanto ride. I'd be willing to bet that if they didn't touch Dinosaur's theme (but fixed it up to be like its glory days again), its wait times and popularity would rise once it's next to an Encanto ride.

 

[SplashJacket]

I believe they said it best.

You should have an experience you want to deliver, but if there’s an IP that fits that experience, you should he’s that IP.

That’s how we got Indy in the first place.

No matter how good you make Dinosaur, it would always be a Jurassic Park/World imitator. People can love it, it could be amazing, but it would still hinder the experience.

If Shanghai Pirates was at Universal w/o the IP, it wouldn’t be as good.

The issue is when you have an IP mandate without an attraction idea, that’s how you get uninspired mediocrity.

Dinosaur sought to out Dinosaur Jurassic Park, it was setup for failure. Journey to the Center of the Earth works far better, even though both have similar goals, because it’s not dominated by preconceived media (even though it’s still technically IP).

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

I think what's more relevant here is Disney's history of rethemes. When have they been an improvement over their predecessors? Guardians I'll give you, but MMRR, Tiana, Mission: Space, Nemo, JIYI, Test Track 2.0, Pooh, and so on... all downgrades.

But again that is just a matter of opinion. Not everyone thinks some or all of those things are downgrades.

Everyone here is trying to give a definitive answer to a question that just doesn’t have one. No attraction is going to appeal to all tastes or please all guests, just as some rethemes will please some more than what it originally was.