Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
Thrill rides can be considered as world class entertainment. Space Mountain?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
No Pixie Hollow???
- Thread starter jmuboy
- Start date
Thrill rides can be considered as world class entertainment. Space Mountain?
DisneyWorldDork
Member
Point taken.
Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
I understand what you mean about the differences (more local at DL, worldwide at WDW) but that doesn't mean the global population isn't looking for thrill rides.
I really don't think a few more thrill rides will hurt any kind of mission statement about any of the parks. I just really don't think Disney's ever been about having rides that cater to the whole family versus having rides that cater to a somewhat smaller segment of the family, it's more about having a pretty good balance between the two. Nobody wants to see any WDW park turn into something like IOA where it almost only caters to thrill junkies, but adding a few more thrill rides here and there wouldn't hurt anything.
Going to WDW is almost like increasing your ride level as a kid, many guests probably go back at least every 4-6 years, so if you start out as a small child and do all the smaller rides, you will go back as you get older, until you can do everything.
Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
JohnLocke;4187749[B said:
THANK YOU!:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy::sohappy::sohappy:
This is why kids who start coming to disney as kids don't come back as teens because it's the same rides they have ridden for years.
Wouldn't a new thrill ride make a family with teens invest in a Disney trip in the future?
lebeau
Well-Known Member
What attraction hasn't?
DisneyWorldDork
Member
I totally get what you guys are saying and I now totally agree with you. But I still feel like that thrills should be put into the other parks before the MK
Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
I understand. I think it's my "if disneyland gets it WDW has to match it" mentality lol. DL has 5 thrills, thats enough for a Disney park to keep a teen thrilled all day, and plus they still have all the fl rides for the little kids and they still have classics like star tours, hm, potc, buzz, jungle cruise for the families.
MK has enough for the little kids, enough for families but not enough for teens. Just one more, one more lol.
MK has enough for the little kids, enough for families but not enough for teens. Just one more, one more lol.
I definitely want to see AK fleshed out on the left side, and some new attractions added to other parts, and MGM get a more cohesive theming, with more attractions and distinguishable lands, but it's this idea that each park is supposed to cater to a different age group that doesn't mesh with me.
Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
It doesn't mesh with me either. People up here believe that Mk shouldn't get thrill rides because that's not where thrill rides belong. What? Sure each park should have something that makes each one special but not to a point where it's ousting a certain group. That ain't right.
That's also most likely (not saying it is) the reason Epcot got rid of WOM and Horizons. The park was to adult and not enough for the younger ones. That's where Test Track, Mission: SPACE, Soarin' and unfortunately The Seas with Nemo and friends came into play.
Tomi-Rocket
Well-Known Member
not bad....
As a mom of two boys I think backing off so much of the intended "girlification" of FLE isn't a bad thing. I was a bit surprised when I saw the original plans at how much was geared to little girls. They hit the head right on the nail when planning the new Art of Disney Animation hotel, it's geared to both sets with Little Mermaid for girls, Cars for boys and Finding Nemo and Lion King attracts both. I hope they can find that balance with FLE now.
As a mom of two boys I think backing off so much of the intended "girlification" of FLE isn't a bad thing. I was a bit surprised when I saw the original plans at how much was geared to little girls. They hit the head right on the nail when planning the new Art of Disney Animation hotel, it's geared to both sets with Little Mermaid for girls, Cars for boys and Finding Nemo and Lion King attracts both. I hope they can find that balance with FLE now.
Yeah, and if you go for the all ages criteria for MK, PH doesn't even fit it. I don't see how what amounts to a gigantic playground is for all ages, if there is a ride, maybe, but as the current concept stands, it just doesn't meet it.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
If "all ages" is your criteria, bye bye Mountains! :wave:
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
With regards to appealing to Teens, (especially teenage males) this has been something Disney has struggled with for years. The Disney name itself has negative connotations to that demographic making it very difficult to cater to them.
The Marvel acquisitin helps this, and while certain movie franchises as well as attractions in the park definitely cater to this demographic there is still the perception that Disney is largely for kids.
Disney will continue to struggle with this. It's all marketing, and it's why they're launching things like Disney XD, the problem is the didn't drop the Disney name so that will undoubtedly turn away some people that may actually enjoy the content. You'd think Disney would learn this considering how conscious they are abotu names after Princess and the Frog and Rapunzel/Tangled.
As for Walt wanting the parks to be a place where the family can enjoy things together. That's definitely true, but he also recognized that not every attraction was going to appeal to everyone in the family. He just wanted to see those attractions all in one centralized locale. Sure Junior couldn't ride teh Matterhorn, but he could hop on the Autopia. Walt was not against thrill rides. But I do think he would be against a park like Islands of Adventure or your local Six Flags.
The Marvel acquisitin helps this, and while certain movie franchises as well as attractions in the park definitely cater to this demographic there is still the perception that Disney is largely for kids.
Disney will continue to struggle with this. It's all marketing, and it's why they're launching things like Disney XD, the problem is the didn't drop the Disney name so that will undoubtedly turn away some people that may actually enjoy the content. You'd think Disney would learn this considering how conscious they are abotu names after Princess and the Frog and Rapunzel/Tangled.
As for Walt wanting the parks to be a place where the family can enjoy things together. That's definitely true, but he also recognized that not every attraction was going to appeal to everyone in the family. He just wanted to see those attractions all in one centralized locale. Sure Junior couldn't ride teh Matterhorn, but he could hop on the Autopia. Walt was not against thrill rides. But I do think he would be against a park like Islands of Adventure or your local Six Flags.
Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
He was referring to how people put the criteria that MK must be for all ages and you proved him right that not everything is going to be for everyone. Once again score for the thrill ride argument.
Yeah, that was my argument. You can't argue against thrill rides by saying MKs supposed to be for the whole family, when you have a large subsection of a land that's devoted almost solely to those 8 and younger. If that same subsection had a thrill ride or something else that caters to older guests then the whole family argument makes more sense, but as it stands now, it does not.
As a poster above said, I, and I don't think anyone else, wants to see WDW turn into a six flags or even IOA, where everything is dominated by mostly attractions for teens and above, but if Disney could do a few more well-themed thrill rides, like Universal's Harry Potter, Spider-Man, and The Mummy, they would be much better off.
Grizzly Hall 71
New Member
POST OF THE DAY!:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy:
ttalovebug
Active Member
Here is what I am thinking
Keep all the princess stuff. It sounded really cute and yes it does really only have a one time factor for most but most people only visit Disney World once. Make Pixie Hollow smaller and just make it a Tinker Bell and friends M&G. Have the Dumbo area be where it was on the leaked blue prints. Than move the tea cups closer to the barn stormer and turn that area into Wonderland (a franchise that is way more popular with everyone) Turn the Barnstormer into the Cheshire Cat coaster that was once rumored. They can finally build the Alice in Wonderland dark ride into MK and obviously make it better.
To help with appealing more to boys
They could work on Adventureland. Remove the Aladdin Carpets :hurl: and put in an Aladdin Dark ride. You could board a magic carpet and soar over Agraba. How awesome would that be!? Then they could referb JC and Tiki Room. And for those of you who keep talking about thrill rides in the MK, they could put in Fire Mountain or the Indiana Jones ride from DL. They could also do something in Tomorrowland. Than they could get some of the old ideas from Disney America (the park that was planned for Virgina) and put them in LS.
Once they do all of this, MK should be good for the next 40 years
:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy::sohappy::sohappy:
:king:
Loving ALL your ideas here! As long as by Wonderland you mean Disney's, not Burton's.
DisneyWorldDork
Member
Oh totally. I mean there would probably be some Burton stuff in the Wonderland gift shop but that would be it.
BrerFrog
Active Member
Yeah, that would be extremely boring.
MK - Slow Dark Rides
AK - Animals
DHS - Shows
EPCOT - Edutainment
Parks need variety, so thrill rides belong in MK as much as they belong in all other parks on the property. Without varierty, there is boredom.