Rumor New ride coming to Animal Kingdom. D23 announcement expected.

[Disney Maddux]

Yes! It would work at the back of the park but the land would have to have a heavy plot that matches the theme of AK.

And again, your idea for the conservation message works perfectly!

 

[JustInTime]

And again, your idea for the conservation message works perfectly!

Yep. If Joe Rhode can make Avatar work, then I have zero concerns. This park is his legacy.

 

[UNCgolf]

Yes! It would work at the back of the park but the land would have to have a heavy plot that matches the theme of AK.

I don't see how it would be possible to put anything back there beyond what's there now. It's like the ride in the Mexico pavilion at EPCOT -- there's just no capacity for anything popular. They'd have to tear out that train and come up with some other transportation system (I think it would be too far to just have a walking path).

Plus, all the veterinary services for the animals are back there.

 

[BlakeW39]

Zootopia 2 can have a conservation message. It’ll relate to us because we are the different animals and it’ll relate to Disney’s Animal Kingdom because somebody will say “We need to save this rainforest!” Perfect fit! Just ignore all of the energy that must be wasted to make Tundra Town work.

lol maybe that's the one way they can make it work. A "NOW THE TABLES HAVE TURNED" narrative where animals have become civilized and humans are living in huts, and its just a revenge montage of Judy and Nick burning all of our houses down.

In all honesty though, that's what I was getting at; some weird narrative where they try to shoehorn a heavy-handed "save the rainforest" message where some fictional biome-based city is in trouble and Judy and Nick must go off to save [insert city name, i.e. savannah square, etc.]

That doesn't work. Zootopia's premise is that the natural world - that which DAK celebrates as its purpose - is over. In ancient times nature was as it is, but all the animals got together and said 'this is scary' so they civilized and at that point, converted the natural world to society. Animals became people and their habitat became our habitat. Therefore all of these sub-areas one would refer to as biomes are actually not because they no longer are no longer ecosystems ans are not governed ny natural laws.

Additionally, the ride would involve Judy and Nick telling us to save a rainforest-city. The #1 rule to storytelling is to show and not tell; DAK in particular tells a story through experience - it's your adventure. Some fast ride where Judy and Nick shove some explicit environmental message down our throats is NOT THEMATICALLY APPROPRIATE OR FITTING.

 

[JustInTime]

And again, your idea for the conservation message works perfectly!

Yep. If Joe Rhode can make Avatar work, then I have zero concerns. This park is his legacy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

lol maybe that's the one way they can make it work. A "NOW THE TABLES HAVE TURNED" narrative where animals have become civilized and humans are living in huts, and its just a revenge montage of Judy and Nick burning all of our houses down.

Zootopia is actually the future of the Planet of the Apes! It’ll fit even more because apes are animals!

 

[JustInTime]

I don't see how it would be possible to put anything back there beyond what's there now. It's like the ride in the Mexico pavilion at EPCOT -- there's just no capacity for anything popular. They'd have to tear out that train and come up with some other transportation system (I think it would be too far to just have a walking path).

Plus, all the veterinary services for the animals are back there.

Actually, that’s exactly what they’d do. The land the train goes around was intended for an expansion and the train was supposed to be temporary. So the train would have to go away. The land would go where the train currently is. It would be themed to the South American rainforest area shown in the film. Maybe the rainforest (their habitat) is in danger and it’s up to Judy and Nick to save the day. All while showing how guests can do the same in the real world.

 

[UNCgolf]

Actually, that’s exactly what they’d do. The land the train goes around was intended for an expansion and the train was supposed to be temporary. So the train would have to go away. The land would go where the train currently is. The land would be themed to the South American rainforest area shown in the film. Maybe the rainforest (their habitat) is in danger and it’s up to Judy and Nick to save the day. All while showing how guests can do the same in the real world.

I don't think they could build something like Zootopia land there. It's right next to the safari and would probably have animal welfare issues. Putting it all the way back where Rafiki is now would be too far away. I guess they could put it where the train loops right between Africa and Asia, but that would really be a thematic issue.

If it wasn't replacing Dinoland, I think the most likely place would be between Pandora and Africa.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Actually, that’s exactly what they’d do. The land the train goes around was intended for an expansion and the train was supposed to be temporary. So the train would have to go away. The land would go where the train currently is. It would be themed to the South American rainforest area shown in the film. Maybe the rainforest (their habitat) is in danger and it’s up to Judy and Nick to save the day. All while showing how guests can do the same in the real world.

They have to save a fake rainforest?

 

[JustInTime]

I don't think they could build something like Zootopia land there. It's right next to the safari and would probably have animal welfare issues. Putting it all the way back where Rafiki is now would be too far away. I guess they could put it where the train loops right between Africa and Asia, but that would really be a thematic issue.

If it wasn't replacing Dinoland, I think the most likely place would be between Pandora and Africa.

I don’t think Zootopia works anywhere else really. But good point. For sure not in the current Dino area. Indy would be better in that spot.

 

[JustInTime]

They have to save a fake rainforest?

I mean, I feel like we have to suspend a level of disbelief when we go into a theme park anyway. Just like over in Asia, that isn’t a real town with a yeti problem. But yet that story is sprinkled all over that land and it works. This would be a rainforest equivalent to Asia and Africa. Again, all armchair but it can absolutely work.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I mean, I feel like we have to suspend a level of disbelief when we go into a theme park anyway. Just like over in Asia, that isn’t a real town with a yeti problem. But yet that story is sprinkled all over that land and it works. This would be a rainforest equivalent to Asia and Africa. Again, all armchair but it can absolutely work.

I’m not talking about the context of a theme park. In Zootopia the neighborhoods are artificial biomes. In the world of the movie you proposed, Nick and Judy would be saving a fake rainforest built in a different climate.

 

[BlakeW39]

This is true but I don’t see how it’s disqualifying. They’re still bunnies and foxes. Should we toss out the Lion King show because it’s also completely based on human society - animals can’t talk, lions aren’t in charge of all the other animals, and male lions don’t run anything. What about the yeti? Or pandora? Mountains don’t really float. I genuinely don’t understand why one is not okay and the others are except that no one around here seems to like the Zootopia IP.

No, they are not still bunnies and foxes. They are superficially bunnies and foxes only in that they share a (very general) appearance.

I think it comes from a misunderstanding of both the natural world and why DAK celebrates it. All of those other IPs are perfect fits because they are about animals. The Lion King is so great because it literally teaches kids about nature and about the circle of life... it's about animals. They are animals which have some traits of humans for storytelling purposes. Zootopia's are humans with some animalian traits for only storytelling purposes. I would usually rlaborate even further but I am just so tired of repeating this; however you get the gist.

Actually, that’s exactly what they’d do. The land the train goes around was intended for an expansion and the train was supposed to be temporary. So the train would have to go away. The land would go where the train currently is. It would be themed to the South American rainforest area shown in the film. Maybe the rainforest (their habitat) is in danger and it’s up to Judy and Nick to save the day. All while showing how guests can do the same in the real world.

That doesn't work, as I have said, because their rainforest is not a rainforest. A rainforest is governed by the laws of nature and the circle of life, animals rely on the rainforest only because other plants and animals live there and provide them with a home. Conservational message only works when we are hurting the environment and we must learn of natures value and how delicate it can be. In the world of Zootopia, there isn't any reason for conservational message and more importantly the animals do not rely upon; animale do not have different behaviors which are suited to different lifestyles in the jungle. Who would even be tearing it down? And why? And why would Judy and Nick care? Most of all, what makes it conservation if it's essentially a town, it's equivalent to the police protecting LA not to conservationists protecting the Amazon or the Congo.

 

[JustInTime]

No, they are not still bunnies and foxes. They are superficially bunnies and foxes only in that they share a (very general) appearance.

I think it comes from a misunderstanding of both the natural world and why DAK celebrates it. All of those other IPs are perfect fits because they are about animals. The Lion King is so great because it literally teaches kids about nature and about the circle of life... it's about animals. They are animals which have some traits of humans for storytelling purposes. Zootopia's are humans with some animalian traits for only storytelling purposes. I would usually rlaborate even further but I am just so tired of repeating this; however you get the gist.



That doesn't work, as I have said, because their rainforest is not a rainforest. A rainforest is governed by the laws of nature and the circle of life, animals rely on the rainforest only because other plants and animals live there and provide them with a home. Conservational message only works when we are hurting the environment and we must learn of natures value and how delicate it can be. In the world of Zootopia, there isn't any reason for conservational message and more importantly the animals do not rely upon; animale do not have different behaviors which are suited to different lifestyles in the jungle. Who would even be tearing it down? And why? And why would Judy and Nick care? Most of all, what makes it conservation if it's essentially a town, it's equivalent to the police protecting LA not to conservationists protecting the Amazon or the Congo.

So you don’t think animals with human characteristics could harm their own climates? Which in turn hurts them? If we care about climate change then shouldn’t animals modeled after us be able to care too?

What if the plot of the ride or land is that they are trying to find out who is harming their rainforest styled town. But at the end of the ride, they find out there is no villain. Their own actions are what is causing the harm? Then the message could come full circle because it can be compared to the real world.

It works for me and I have no doubt it can be done well. I get people disagree and that is totally okay! Animal Kingdom is the best theme park in Orlando and we should all be cautious. But if Joe is involved, I feel confident it will be fine. There are much wiser minds that will take whatever is coming and can elevate it in ways we can’t imagine. I am just trying to put an angle out there what could work.

My dream would be an expanded Dinoland, anyway.

 

[BlakeW39]

So you don’t think animals with human characteristics could harm their own climates? Which in turn hurts them? If we care about climate change then shouldn’t animals modeled after us be able to care too?

What if the plot of the ride or land is that they are trying to find out who is harming their rainforest styled town. But at the end of the ride, they find out there is no villain. Their own actions are what is causing the harm? Then the message could come full circle because it can be compared to the real world.

It works for me and I have no doubt it can be done well. I get people disagree and that is totally okay! Animal Kingdom is the best theme park in Orlando and we should all be cautious. But if Joe is involved, I feel confident it will be fine. There are much wiser minds that will take whatever is coming and can elevate it in ways we can’t imagine. I am just trying to put an angle out there what could work.

My dream would be an expanded Dinoland, anyway.

Well all of us beside the Bobs know that Dinoland writes itself and should be expanded immediately with a tasteful budget. I as well would like to see such a land.

But to your first point, yes. That is exactly what I mean. The animapeople of Zootopia harming the rainforest - which isn't a rainforest at all and is not a natural ecosystem but rather the town that they live in - and wanting to save it because they live there and depend upon it is not an instrinsic value conservational message. They don't want to save the rainforest because nature holds innate value, they want to save it for extrinsic and selfish reasons - they need it because they live there. It's the reason DAK approaches conservation as if nature is intrinsically important, that is that we save the rainforest because it is valuable without benefiting us in anyway, and does not approach conservation in a way that states we save the rainforest because we need it for climate control. That's Epcots job. Your idea would fit far more toward the themes of the Land Pavillion and not in DAK; though it still does not fit there either because it really just isn't a real ecosystem.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So you don’t think animals with human characteristics could harm their own climates? Which in turn hurts them? If we care about climate change then shouldn’t animals modeled after us be able to care too?

What if the plot of the ride or land is that they are trying to find out who is harming their rainforest styled town. But at the end of the ride, they find out there is no villain. Their own actions are what is causing the harm? Then the message could come full circle because it can be compared to the real world.

It works for me and I have no doubt it can be done well. I get people disagree and that is totally okay! Animal Kingdom is the best theme park in Orlando and we should all be cautious. But if Joe is involved, I feel confident it will be fine. There are much wiser minds that will take whatever is coming and can elevate it in ways we can’t imagine. I am just trying to put an angle out there what could work.

My dream would be an expanded Dinoland, anyway.

The film shows these places to be artificial. You're houseplants dying because you don't properly maintain your house is not an environmental message about the power of nature.

 

[JustInTime]

Well all of us beside the Bobs know that Dinoland writes itself and should be expanded immediately with a tasteful budget. I as well would like to see such a land.

But to your first point, yes. That is exactly what I mean. The animapeople of Zootopia harming the rainforest - which isn't a rainforest at all and is not a natural ecosystem but rather the town that they live in - and wanting to save it because they live there and depend upon it is not an instrinsic value conservational message. They don't want to save the rainforest because nature holds innate value, they want to save it for extrinsic and selfish reasons - they need it because they live there. It's the reason DAK approaches conservation as if nature is intrinsically important, that is that we save the rainforest because it is valuable without benefiting us in anyway, and does not approach conservation in a way that states we save the rainforest because we need it for climate control. That's Epcots job. Your idea would fit far more toward the themes of the Land Pavillion and not in DAK; though it still does not fit there either because it really just isn't a real ecosystem.

I see exactly what you mean. I am no expert in all this, so please don’t take my opinion and suggestion as anything more. I still feel that it could work as long as the project is in the right hands.

In the mean time, lest hope something of substance comes to Dinoland instead. I think we’d all be happy there. We are in for a *hopefully* exciting weekend.

 

[BlakeW39]

I see exactly what you mean. I am no expert in all this, so please don’t take my opinion and suggestion as anything more. I still feel that it could work as long as the project is in the right hands.

In the mean time, lest hope something of substance comes to Dinoland instead. I think we’d all be happy there. We are in for a *hopefully* exciting weekend.

Hopefully exciting indeed. I do hooe whatever goes to Dinoland - if anything at all - doesn't replace the dinosaurian theme but rather plusses it.

 

[JustInTime]

Hopefully exciting indeed. I do hooe whatever goes to Dinoland - if anything at all - doesn't replace the dinosaurian theme but rather plusses it.

My thoughts as well. We need animals of past, present and fantasy represented in the park. It would be a shame to lose the Dino’s

 

[CastAStone]

Thanks for the clarification.

I apologise to @Castastone then, but I still hope you understand the topic instead of spreading misinformation.

I wrote a big long response but I think I’m just going to accept your apology and note that the Animal Kingdom you see (which sounds like the intended vision) and the Animal Kingdom I see (my personal experiences) are probably pretty darn different already.