New FL area will be called Fantasy Forest

sponono88

Well-Known Member
!!

WHAT?

They're going to rename Disney's California Adventure to Fantasy Forest?

That doesn't make a whit of sense, nor does the new
Dark Ride, Cinderella III. There is no Cinderella I or II ride. People
won't get it. They just can't skip two rides like that. Talk about
trying to build parks on the cheap, skipping two rides.

And what does Paradise Pier have to do with a Forest anyway?
Bad theming.

it's not a dark ride! It's a Cinderella III: A Twist in Time meet-and-greet! First you meet Lady Tremaine, then she reverses time and lets guests go ride the old 20K Submarines!

:zipit:
 

Festivus

Active Member
I really don't see why people think a thrill ride in FL is a bad thing. Everything in Fl doesn't have to be for little kids. A new coaster will do the trick if all these rumors are true about the Barnstormer being removed.

Personally, I think having a thrill ride in Fantasyland would be a mistake. FL is for kids 10 and under. I would mch rather see a thrill ride go up in place of the Treehouse in Adventureland or the Tomorrowland Speedway. Heck, replace both with a thrill ride or an expansive dark ride...
 

SirGoofy

Member
Personally, I think having a thrill ride in Fantasyland would be a mistake. FL is for kids 10 and under. I would mch rather see a thrill ride go up in place of the Treehouse in Adventureland or the Tomorrowland Speedway. Heck, replace both with a thrill ride or an expansive dark ride...

No need to replace when there's unused land to be exploited.
 

Atomicmickey

Well-Known Member
it's not a dark ride! It's a Cinderella III: A Twist in Time meet-and-greet! First you meet Lady Tremaine, then she reverses time and lets guests go ride the old 20K Submarines!

:zipit:

Right, and you make a birthday card for Captain Nemo.
In the forest, with Mater.
 

sponono88

Well-Known Member
If anyone else thinks I'm a burden please let me know. I've always been myself on this forum. Maybe if you tell me I'm the troll I'll try to avoid you so you don't get all bothered by my nonsense posts.

it's not that you're a burden, it's the way you phrase your comments. The whole "i'm right, you're wrong and that's final" attitude is quite rude. Try taking other people's views/comments into consideration. And if you disagree with someone, it probably isn't the best idea to say ''you're a joke!''.
 

WDW Vacationer

Active Member
Oh, I get it. A troll lives under the pier. Now it makes total sense.
Yep!

it's not that you're a burden, it's the way you phrase your comments. The whole "i'm right, you're wrong and that's final" attitude is quite rude. Try taking other people's views/comments into consideration. And if you disagree with someone, it probably isn't the best idea to say ''you're a joke!''.

Exactly! Thanks for that post!
 

SirGoofy

Member
it's not that you're a burden, it's the way you phrase your comments. The whole "i'm right, you're wrong and that's final" attitude is quite rude. Try taking other people's views/comments into consideration. And if you disagree with someone, it probably isn't the best idea to say ''you're a joke!''.

Agreed.
 

janoimagine

Well-Known Member
it's not that you're a burden, it's the way you phrase your comments. The whole "i'm right, you're wrong and that's final" attitude is quite rude. Try taking other people's views/comments into consideration. And if you disagree with someone, it probably isn't the best idea to say ''you're a joke!''.

Exactly ... um ... what they said.
 

_Scar

Active Member
it's not that you're a burden, it's the way you phrase your comments. The whole "i'm right, you're wrong and that's final" attitude is quite rude. Try taking other people's views/comments into consideration. And if you disagree with someone, it probably isn't the best idea to say ''you're a joke!''.


When you take my posts from another site and say I'm trolling those forums when actually I participate, am respectful, and am nice then it kinda is a low blow. I spend my time here and there and a few other places and be myself. I devote a bit of my time talking and chatting with other people. When you say I'm trolling that forum, and now others say this one it makes me feel really low and bitter. I'm a very nice person but when you do that it's a whole new level of disrespect.
 

The Conundrum

New Member
To be frank, _Scar is correct that the projects coming to DCA don't really make sense if they are keeping the "California" name and I am suspicious about the rides greenlit. For example:

Disney didn't give two ____**s about the Little Mermaid until it came out on DVD and broke every record in the book in 2006. A year later all of a sudden Little Mermaid is not only greenlit after sitting on the shelf for two decades but its now a big budget e-ticket. Im sure it helps that Ron Clemens & Jon Musker were Lasseter's college buddies.

CarsLand. Again the movie didn't do so hot and was the least liked of all the pixar movies yet the Cars merchandise proved to sell very well with boys ages 3-11 plus it was directed by Lasseter so not only do they greenlit 1 ride they greenlight a whole land for 1 movie that takes up half the real estate in the park. Not even Star Wars enjoys its own land yet "cars" of all properties does get a land.

World of Color: Hey Fantasmic is popular. Lets make a show just like that but also include Pixar and Pirates of the Caribbean because those properties are hot right now $$$

I'm not really complaining but at the same time the selection process for the projects picked for the "DCA rebranding" are questionable. At the same time I think its BS that great ride concepts have to sit on the shelf because they are not based on a preexisting movie franchise thats making bank at the boxoffice and/or directed by Lasseter. Reminds me of something Enderkairi and Corrus told me once...
 

misterID

Well-Known Member
From earlier in the thread, before the whole DCA theme came up ... If there is a "Lucasland" in MGM wouldn't an Idy ride go there and not in Adventure Land?

Or is Indy already planned to go in AL?
 

sponono88

Well-Known Member
When you take my posts from another site and say I'm trolling those forums when actually I participate, am respectful, and am nice then it kinda is a low blow. I spend my time here and there and a few other places and be myself. I devote a bit of my time talking and chatting with other people. When you say I'm trolling that forum, and now others say this one it makes me feel really low and bitter. I'm a very nice person but when you do that it's a whole new level of disrespect.

I didn't say you weren't a nice person, I said you should use more common courtesy when posting. You were banned to the litter box in the other website, wasn't that a sign that maybe you should change your posting style here as well?

and thanks for bringing that up, The Conondrum - just when we were about to move on from this whole DCA debate :hammer:
 

Figment1986

Well-Known Member
Just for logic's sake, I'll point out that it is near impossible to jam a loop into a Vekoma roller skater's layout... Plus, the trains don't even come close to the speed needed to complete a loop without valleying. If in the unlikely chance that Disney decided to put in a looping coaster in Fantasyland, it would be a brand new coaster--there is no realistic way to make the Barnstormer loop...

That being said, I could easily see us sending the Barnstormer over to Hong Kong Disneyland for a Toy Story Land retheme while we get a new ride.

True on the loop, and sas you said, send it to Hong Kong, or even better. Paris where they need rides... then we can get a better "Family" coaster with more airtime and speed :lookaroun maybe a loop or two :drevil: :lol:
 

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

Back
Top Bottom