New nighttime show 'Rivers of Light' confirmed to be coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[Mike S]

I feel that it was discussed 10+ years ago, but getting to that land would be a bit tough. It would require either extremely long queues to get back there and/or relocating Maharajah Jungle Trek and/or the train.

A long trek through the jungle to get to a Jungle Book boat ride would work fantastically.

 

[RSoxNo1]

A long trek through the jungle to get to a Jungle Book boat ride would work fantastically.

They could also remove Kali...

 

[Mike S]

They could also remove Kali...

I was thinking pure expansion. While I don't care for Kali and much prefer Popeye I guess it serves its purpose. Maybe it could leave at a different point in time.

 

[danlb_2000]

Actually they where announce in the same year, Potter a few months earlier then carsland as well as Hogwarts was finished/opened first.

Yes, you are right, Potter was announced 5 months prior to Carsland, but Carsland concept art appeared in the Disney annual report at the end of 2006.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I was thinking pure expansion. While I don't care for Kali and much prefer Popeye I guess it serves its purpose. Maybe it could leave at a different point in time.

I have absolutely no engineering skills, but I think that Kali could theoretically be expanded at the top of the lift hill. Failing that, the park definitely needs a water ride so if it were to be removed it would have to be replaced with another similar ride (raft ride or flume).

 

[ToTBellHop]

I have absolutely no engineering skills, but I think that Kali could theoretically be expanded at the top of the lift hill. Failing that, the park definitely needs a water ride so if it were to be removed it would have to be replaced with another similar ride (raft ride or flume).

While short, I don't think the bones of the ride are problematic and the drop is fun. Keep the ride system and provide more compelling visuals (worthy of the queue). I feel this is a common problem at DAK: the place-setting is stunning but the actual rides have merely "pretty-good" visuals. Kilimanjaro is the only exception to me. I fear Pandora will suffer from the same issue.

 

[WildcatDen]

And I'm supposed to be the cynical one here...

If I could add to this. Why am I not surprised you are silent on the fact that IT SEEMS, Disney does not want to open a subpar rendition of this attraction. I thought, in your words, since Disney is about to go out of business, they would open this as is and not even consider upgrading? But then again, construction hasn't started in SWL either, right

 

[RSoxNo1]

While short, I don't think the bones of the ride are problematic and the drop is fun. Keep the ride system and provide more compelling visuals (worthy of the queue). I feel this is a common problem at DAK: the place-setting is stunning but the actual rides have merely "pretty-good" visuals. Kilimanjaro is the only exception to me. I fear Pandora will suffer from the same issue.

If Kali could get another minute or two with visuals (perhaps even covered/indoor sections that parallel the queue) it would be a much better attraction. With Everest they need to fix the Yeti and the light leakage on the backwards section. That would solve the visuals there.

 

[marni1971]

I feel this is a common problem at DAK: the place-setting is stunning but the actual rides have merely "pretty-good" visuals. Kilimanjaro is the only exception to me. I fear Pandora will suffer from the same issue.

Very well put.

 

[GhostHost1000]

While short, I don't think the bones of the ride are problematic and the drop is fun. Keep the ride system and provide more compelling visuals (worthy of the queue). I feel this is a common problem at DAK: the place-setting is stunning but the actual rides have merely "pretty-good" visuals. Kilimanjaro is the only exception to me. I fear Pandora will suffer from the same issue.

completely agree with this as well

 

[lazyboy97o]

The analogy still doesn't work. Putting Nemo adjacent to the Living Seas is nothing like putting Elsa in Moana.

Putting Elsa in Moana would be like putting Nemo in Peter Pan's Flight. That's equally ridiculous.

Theme is established at the land level, not the attraction level. Discrete attractions is an amusement park.

Right, Snow White was a huge flop. And the characters from that were not featured prominently at all.

That was the one true hit included. For a park opened in 1955, it's one big IP dated to 1937.

Why were they interested in Walt as a storyteller? Because he had already proven himself a storyteller. Through short films and movies. Alice was an IP. Oswald was an IP.

Alice in Wonderland was a dud, just like much of Disney's film work in the decade and a half leading up to Disneyland. Oswald was lost after less than a year, back in 1928, so he is completely irrelevant. Disney's reputation was solidified in the 1930s but that is not the dominate source of Disneyland content.

Never mind for the moment that he stole the vast majority of his stories from other sources. He was a far better director than talent. He knew he wasn't the best artist, he knew he wasn't the best songwriter. He hired those people and guided them with his vision, and mostly rewrote other peoples' stories.

This is in no way relevant.

But comparing IPs then and now is as pointless as comparing telephones then and now. It's a completely different world. The reality is they matter, and a lot of people expect to see them when they come to the parks.

It is not pointless because if IP was so important than Islands of Adventure would be doing much better while still very much IP-free wow would be doing worse.

As to your disputed analogy, I already explained that in another post. I think you just didn't think through the idea completely or possible counter arguments. Again putting Disney animals into a show about animals is nothing like putting a character from one land and story into a completely irrelevant land and story.

So some parks used to have no or few characters. That's over. That's not dumbed down, that's not incorrect. That's knowing your audience.

The analogy isn't working for you because you do not equate themed entertainment to its own storytelling medium. You keep reducing it to mere images, a decoration. In the case of Disney's Animal Kingdom it is not just a hodgepodge of animals, so something including an animal does not automatically make it relevant.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Still not open?

I'll check back in March.

 

[21stamps]

Theme is established at the land level, not the attraction level. Discrete attractions is an amusement park.


That was the one true hit included. For a park opened in 1955, it's one big IP dated to 1937.


Alice in Wonderland was a dud, just like much of Disney's film work in the decade and a half leading up to Disneyland. Oswald was lost after less than a year, back in 1928, so he is completely irrelevant. Disney's reputation was solidified in the 1930s but that is not the dominate source of Disneyland content.


This is in no way relevant.


It is not pointless because if IP was so important than Islands of Adventure would be doing much better while still very much IP-free wow would be doing worse.


The analogy isn't working for you because you do not equate themed entertainment to its own storytelling medium. You keep reducing it to mere images, a decoration. In the case of Disney's Animal Kingdom it is not just a hodgepodge of animals, so something including an animal does not automatically make it relevant.

Have you seen the Tree of Life awakenings? Those characters fit perfectly. All are relevant to the park.

 

[TabulaRasa]

Still not open?

I'll check back in March.

I'm still hoping for early January, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Brian Noble]

Or did they not learn from Carnival de Lumiere?

Or perhaps they learned from DCA's World of Color. It's mostly an SRO show, but somewhat unpleasant to wait for.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Have you seen the Tree of Life awakenings? Those characters fit perfectly. All are relevant to the park.

Because it's not an ip.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

While short, I don't think the bones of the ride are problematic and the drop is fun. Keep the ride system and provide more compelling visuals (worthy of the queue). I feel this is a common problem at DAK: the place-setting is stunning but the actual rides have merely "pretty-good" visuals. Kilimanjaro is the only exception to me. I fear Pandora will suffer from the same issue.

I agree. I'm inclined to mention my belief it goes beyond DAK though, affecting lot of newer Disney rides built after the early 90s. It is particularly noticeable at DAK, likely because the amazing quality of the theming in the outside and queue areas putting the lesser details of the rides themselves in even greater contrast.

The replacement rides at Epcot's Future World during the mid to late 90s felt extremely empty and bland compared to their original forms as well.

New Fantasyland rides are also lacking in scenery, either poorly done (Mermaid) or not enough (7DMT). 7DMT was intended to have additional mine scenes, and art had much better outside scenery. More streams passing through, I suspect a better night lighting package (there were extra gemstones scattered around the mine entrances probably intended to be lit internally for an after-dark spectacle), and a little scene of the 7 dwarfs marching along the top of a fallen tree.

Even the new Frozen ride has some let-downs visually within the confines of the space it has to work with (the second level feels empty). Even the already modestly themed Slinky Dog coaster has showcased a severe downgrade in scenery from its originally released art and newer art...

 

[FigmentJedi]

Even the new Frozen ride has some let-downs visually within the confines of the space it has to work with (the second level feels empty).

That's just as much the fault of the movie itself having some really sparse production design when it came to Elsa's castle.

 

[GhostHost1000]

In reference to some of the kali talk, how about making it a river ride where you don't get wet

 

[OvertheHorizon]

In reference to some of the kali talk, how about making it a river ride where you don't get wet

Or at least not soaked... requiring you to leave the park and change clothes.