http://www.themeparkinsider.com/rumors/
i doubt very many of these are true, but can someone verify the ones that are?
i doubt very many of these are true, but can someone verify the ones that are?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Rumors. Rumors, Rumors
- Thread starter mr snrub
- Start date
Thrawn
Account Suspended
The Forbidden Mountain one is true, Expedition Everest land has been cleared.
Early Entry is back, it is now called the Extra Magic Hour.
The one about countries getting new rides is not necessarily true, nothing is greenlighted yet, and it won't be Soarin, simply because that is being used in The Land.
Beastly Kingdom is going nowhere fast at the moment.
WestCOT is not going anywhere either, mostly because they need to fix DCA before they build a third park.
Someone else can continue with the ones that aren't from the top.
Early Entry is back, it is now called the Extra Magic Hour.
The one about countries getting new rides is not necessarily true, nothing is greenlighted yet, and it won't be Soarin, simply because that is being used in The Land.
Beastly Kingdom is going nowhere fast at the moment.
WestCOT is not going anywhere either, mostly because they need to fix DCA before they build a third park.
Someone else can continue with the ones that aren't from the top.
WDWfan2209
New Member
I know these are rumors but it says for DCA Rock'n'Rollercoaster starring someone else? I heard it was going to be an exact copy of the one at MGM.
cookiee_munster
Well-Known Member
NOOO!!!
disneydawg
New Member
I doubt we'll ever see an epcot clone anywhere else in the world. Aside from the standard MK at the worldwide resorts, the studios model seems the easiet to clone elsewhere.
As for Beastly, I'd like to think that we'll see it some day. But it sure doesnt look great now with EE on the way. But it makes perfect sense to build a land of animals that never were. Maybe it will come along, just without that E-ride Reign of Fire that was rumored to be coming. The concept art for this land looks very cool. Keep hope alive.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
well, we will certainly see an attraction with dragons someday, but it will probably just have to fit into one of the other lands...otherwise they need to take the dragon out of the park logo.
I have never understood the basis of the argument that they HAVE to have a dragon based attraction simply because it is part of the logo.
In Paris, Space Mountain still has the title "Discovery Mountain" in its logo, but the attraction has not changed name to that, neither has the logo changed.
I don't think logos are good basis to say that we will certainly see an a specific attraction.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Park logos advertise parks. So, one would argue, having a park logo showing something the park does not have is false advertisement, and all-around bad-show. Having a logo for a ride showing a name that the ride does not have is also bad show...but the entire Walt Disney Studios Paris is bad show, so I wouldn't put that past the Disneyland Paris Resort.
I would disagree with that. A logo is to provide easy recognition of something. Images that appear in the logo do not HAVE to appear in the product/company/service.
How many times have you been to Disneyland Paris Resort? What did you think to Space Mountain? I dont think anyone who has experienced Space Mountain in Paris would ever use the words "Bad Show", so I am assuming you are just stating this as fact like you often do, without actually knowing.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
I did not say Space Mountain was bad show. I said having a logo showing something you do not have is bad show. Having a logo with "Discovery Mountain" on it, a non-existant attraction, is bad show. If I see something advertising that the Magic Kingdom has a castle, I had better see a castle when I go there. Stating something as fact without knowing? I know that telling guests to look for something they will not find within the park is bad show. Kind of like commercials showing fireworks at Disney's California Adventure or children who are clearly not 48" in height riding California Screamin'.
We obviously have VERY different ideas to what a logo represents. If you wish to believe that just because there is a dragon in the AK logo there will be a dragon attraction, fine LOL. In my opinion you have that totally wrong.
Anyhow, there is a Komodo dragon in the park, does that fulfill your requirement of having some kind of dragon in the park since its in the logo?
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Actually, that is exactly what Disney is trying to do. In the vacation planning video, they say "even dragons" and show the komodo. A stretch, but to each his own. If Disney simply fixed up the Discovery Island boats to make it feel like it was originally supposed to, with guests being attacked by a dragon, it would all work out...no need for an expensive land. Just bring the boats back and make a ride out of em.
Tim G
Well-Known Member
I don't know why everyone makes such a fuzz about........
A logo usually represents a company and in this case a park, it represents the park's name ... Not what's in it...
ie.
It could mean All kind of animals from the start of civilization to now...
What's being meant here is a wide spectrum of animals...
That a lot of people see dragons in the drawings is entirely up to them....
Please remember, Dragons Never Existed....
Dragons are fantasy and should belong somehow in a disney park... but then in Fantasy Land... Just as there is one in DLP....
And certainly not in Animal Kingdom...
cookiee_munster
Well-Known Member
but why wont Beastly Kingdom get built???
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
The point behind Animal Kingdom has always been to showcase animals real, extinct, and imagined. If dragons don't belong, then neither does the Yeti (as far as I am concerned, he is imaginary, too).