Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
I think a lot of the contention over the Muppets replacement springs from the fact that it's the secondary attraction in a "new" land but is also a replacement for a beloved attraction. Even many posters who expect everything that has been announced to be built in some form acknowledge that the final product will likely be "value engineered" and will see significant cuts. I don't think anyone would be particularly surprised, for instance, if the second Cars attraction in MK got the chop. On THOSE terms, the Monsters show seems like the sort of thing that's disappeared into the vapor so many times before. The fact that the theater will remain standing and not be replaced by the headliner, however, makes it seem like something meaningful HAS to go into that space. Of course, a cynic would say that if Disney was planning to close Muppets and leave the theater vacant as part of the Monsters overlay, they would absolutely have to pay lip service to a direct replacement even if they had no firm plans to build one simply as a matter of PR. Put it this way - do Disney execs think that they get a significantly greater attendance and merchandise boost from the door coaster and a new show then they get from the coaster alone?
Ultimately, something will likely go in the Muppets space. It might be a high-tech new extravaganza, it might be a quick-and-cheap costumed character show... and it might be a meet-and-greet. The last option just seems to make a huge amount of sense from the perspective of a Disney exec and would fit neatly into a well-established pattern.
Ultimately, something will likely go in the Muppets space. It might be a high-tech new extravaganza, it might be a quick-and-cheap costumed character show... and it might be a meet-and-greet. The last option just seems to make a huge amount of sense from the perspective of a Disney exec and would fit neatly into a well-established pattern.