Rumor Lion King Flume Ride being considered for Animal Kingdom

Po'Rich

Well-Known Member
First, since when is this park required to only focus on the interaction of man and animals? Why is the interaction of animals and animals not enough at a park called Animal Kingdom? Why can’t learning about animal interactions help man be better at interacting with animals? Why can’t man learn to take a break from itself sometimes? I digress.

Second, this gripe about it being a book report ride comes down to personal preference for an original story; not a requirement for the park to fulfill its objectives. Countdown to Extinction would’ve been a book report ride if they had happened to make a movie or book about it beforehand — and doing so would’ve made it no less relevant to the park. There is nothing inherently at odds about Animal Kingdom and the ability to experience stories that were previously told in some way if they highlight animals or help us learn about animals. There is a valid broader argument about recent lack of originality at Disney parks on the whole, but I don’t find this proposed ride at this proposed park to be an offender when everything is so perfect about it.

Third, and the silliest point to have to make: The Lion King is a movie about animals. Period. Whether some plot points come from Hamlet or not, whether they speak English or Swahili or sing or not, the story has been adapted to represent a fictional animal “kingdom” (pun intended). The movie does not work if you keep all the scenes and dialogue and replace the characters with humans doing the same things. Because they’re not doing human things. They’re doing animal things, like roaring and hunting in the tall grass. It’s not about human society or human concerns. Lions do have power and succession struggles. Lions can feel sadness and depression. Hyenas do hunt in packs and prey on lion cubs. Warthogs do charge with their tusks. Mandrills do hold up newborn lion cubs off the side of cliffs to announce their birth to audiences of zebras giraffes and elephants (ok that’s a stretch but humans don’t do that either — this is fiction people!!)

“Everything you see exists together in a delicate balance. As king, you need to understand that balance and respect all the creatures from the crawling ant to the leaping antelope.”

“But don’t we eat the antelope?”

“Yes, Simba. But let me explain. When we die, our bodies become the grass and the antelope eat the grass, and so we are all connected in the great circle of life.”


That ain’t Hamlet
Despite what some developers may have said, the connection to Hamlet is also very marginal at best. Once you get beyond the idea that the king was killed by his brother and the heir prince feels angst, there is next to no connection.

The reason for the angst (which is a major part of both movies) is also completely different. In Lion King, Simba feels angst because he feels responsible for Mufasa's death. Hamlet never believes that he is somehow responsible for the king's death. His angst is over his course of action (does he murder Claudius based on the word of a ghost?). Once Simba knows that he is not responsible for Mufasa's death, he is quick to act with no hesitancy. There are no prolonged attempts to discover the truth and there is no moral quandary over murder as an action.

These are completely different stories, which further supports your point that Lion King is a unique fictional story about an animal kingdom.
 

tanc

Well-Known Member
If this comes to fruition, I really hope they make it more akin to Splash Mountain in terms of functionality. Cut back on the quality of animatronics if it means that the attraction will actually run properly for a day.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Certainly. But it is unheard of for an animal to defeat the leader of his group of animals in order to take over? Obviously the characters in TLK have some human qualities - to make them interesting and relatable - but in a big picture sense they are still animals behaving as animals. They certainly fit the “no pants” rule.
This is exactly why I said maybe we should ask why something that every Armchair Imagineer thinks up isn’t there. It’s an obvious idea that’s right there. So why has it not been done? Does that not provoke the thought that maybe it doesn’t actually align with the vision?
 

ConfettiCupcake

Well-Known Member
I am as much against IP for the sake of IP as the next guy, and wish they’d remember some of their best attractions are not IP based or are based on obscure IP, but at some point I think it’s relevant to point out that this is Walt Disney World we’re talking about, Disney. There’s gonna be IP.

There has been so much shoe horned and poor fit IP over the years, especially more recent years. TLK attraction in AK strikes me as one of the best fits they’ve done in years, should it actually happen.
 

zipadee999

Well-Known Member
Is it rumored to be a traditional flume? and not just a frozen ever after adjacent boat ride?
If so, please tell me that Scar is at the top and he tries to ‘drop’ us like he did Mufasa. They better not take another awesome villain and omit him from an attraction in favor of ‘Timon and Pumba’s Prepare for the Biggest Party on the Savannah Adventure’

Personally I’m leaning towards a flume ride with a considerable drop. Navi already fills the ‘calm and relaxing’ void. Kali already fills the ‘get you soaked’ void. The only gap in their water ride lineup is a ‘big drop.’

For those worried about thematic clashing with the rest of the Africa section, I think of how Splash was at Magic Kingdom. Splash featured ‘cartoons’ in a realistic land, and rather than going all or nothing, it opted for realism on the outside, and slowly acclimated the riders into the cartoon world before fully immersing them once inside the showbuilding. I think Lion King could easily have a realistic facade to be viewed from all outside guest areas, and slowly acclimate riders into the animated world once they enter the queue.
 
Again, I don’t think anyone in this thread has ever said Lion King as an IP doesn’t belong in Animal Kingdom, just that execution matters and it doesn’t automatically exemplify the park’s mission just by existing in whatever form.
~96% of the forms this attraction could conceivably take are well within the mission of the park -- even the "book report". Disney would have to go far out of its way to take The Lion King and turn it into an attraction that made you think "why is this here?". Like omitting Circle of Life, or omitting the animals

Encanto and Indy, on the other hand, are trickier. I estimate there's about 38% of forms that attraction could take that are within the mission of the park. Disney has to go out of its way to make it work. Not impossible, just harder. Hence the comparisons people have made why the former is even a debate compared to the latter. Personally, I don't mind a land that builds on the trend of exploring fauna from another region of the world in the vein of Asia and Africa. But the rides, in this case, can't be simple book reports else they will feel out of place

I too would love a traditional flume with drops
 
Last edited:

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
~96% of the forms this attraction could conceivably take are well within the mission of the park -- even the "book report". Disney would have to go far out of its way to take The Lion King and turn it into an attraction that made you think "why is this here?". Like omitting Circle of Life, or omitting the animals.
Strongly disagree. Animal Kingdom originally went the route of the safari, FotLK, and the Tree of Life for a reason—to incorporate The Lion King's relevant DNA without rehashing the largely irrelevant plot (to the themes of the park).
 

bwr827

Well-Known Member
It really isn't. Animal behaviours may be incorporated into the film and the setting certainly influences how the film's messages are communicated more generally. However, beyond some of these more superficial characteristics, it really is not a film aimed to shine a light on how animals live and love.
Little Timmy: I love Lion King! Roar!

WDW Forum: You know those aren’t even real animals, right?
 
Strongly disagree. Animal Kingdom originally went the route of the safari, FotLK, and the Tree of Life for a reason—to incorporate The Lion King's relevant DNA without rehashing the largely irrelevant plot (to the themes of the park).
We cant read so deep into decisions that reflect more than just creative vision, like budget and capacity. FotLK was in a completely different land with meet and greets that were about 1000x less relevant to learning about animals than the plot of TLK. And as we know, that wasn’t the original intent for that space anyway. A Lion King ride was previously planned for the park by Rhode himself, and ultimately cut for reasons we don’t know. Others have made this point
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
A Lion King ride was previously planned for the park by Rhode himself, and ultimately cut for reasons we don’t know. Others have made this point
And that’s not The Lion King ride we’re discussing. The thing people were responding to was the notion that it might be a clone of an Adventure World ride, which some posters were also hoping would be a book report despite claiming previously that they were hyper-dedicated to the themes of the park when it served their interests relative to IP they don’t like.
Little Timmy: I love Lion King! Roar!

WDW Forum: You know those aren’t even real animals, right?
We all know this forum is about something that is ultimately meant to be fun and not that important in the grand scheme of things, but, uh, it’s weird that you have chosen to be here at all if you just want to dismiss all in-depth conversation as pointless and overwrought. You can go enjoy the parks without troubling yourself over others who are obviously going to assess things a bit more critically than the average parkgoer.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
This is exactly why I said maybe we should ask why something that every Armchair Imagineer thinks up isn’t there. It’s an obvious idea that’s right there. So why has it not been done? Does that not provoke the thought that maybe it doesn’t actually align with the vision?
I think you are trying to say that just because they haven’t built a TLK ride “yet” that it indicates that such a ride wouldn’t fit the park? That seems like a massive leap - a ton of attractions that have been talked about and never been built would be great fits for various parks. Does Jungle Book not fit just because it was never added to DAK? Bambi?

I mean the park has hovered around a dozen attractions and a single digit ride count. That speaks much more to underinvestment than to the fit of any particular ride option.
 

OptimusPrime

Active Member
In the Parks
No
And that’s not The Lion King ride we’re discussing. The thing people were responding to was the notion that it might be a clone of an Adventure World ride, which some posters were also hoping would be a book report despite claiming previously that they were hyper-dedicated to the themes of the park when it served their interests relative to IP they don’t like.

We all know this forum is about something that is ultimately meant to be fun and not that important in the grand scheme of things, but, uh, it’s weird that you have chosen to be here at all if you just want to dismiss all in-depth conversation as pointless and overwrought. You can go enjoy the parks without troubling yourself over others who are obviously going to assess things a bit more critically than the average parkgoer.
This isn’t an in-depth conversation.

This is nearly as brain-dead as the Tiana thread’s discussion on Song of the South’s race issues.

The Lion King is a film that people like. Okay. You’re following me. Good. Okay.

And it’s about nature, and the circle of life. Okay stay with me, I know it’s getting hard.

It is the film that people think of when they think of Animal Kingdom. (Look at how many dads have Hakuna Matata shirts) Okay follow me for a minute you can do it.

The film takes place in Africa, a land in Animal Kingdom. We’re almost there.

It’s not replacing anything other than a small bit of Safari land.

Therefore, Lion King would be a logical addition to the park. It is literally something that people have been asking for. But because you want to be different and look smart, you’ve opted to cry that LION KING doesn’t fit ANIMAL KINGDOM.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom