Would You Like To See The Cars Land Sci-fi Drive-In Be Resurrected?

[Californian Elitist]

You mean why I don’t understand you. This is a debate so many don’t understand you.

“So many?” Based on the amount of likes lazyboy gets, there are a few of us who not only understand what he says, but agrees with it, myself included.

But it does seem you don’t understand the conversation regarding IPs, at least the standpoint from which we’re coming from.

 

[DanielBB8]

“So many?” Based on the amount of likes lazyboy gets, there are a few of us who not only understand what he says, but agrees with it, myself included.

But it does seem you don’t understand the conversation regarding IPs, at least the standpoint from which we’re coming from.

So there’s no debate? You’re kidding.

You have no idea what I understand since I read many pages of this with amazement and amusement. I’m only questioning why bother, but you obviously know better so the droning continues. Have at it.

 

[Disney Irish]

We’re debating about the inclusion of IPs in the parks because this is a discussion board and because we want to. Thank you for contributing to the debate you seem to be complaining about, by the way. No one said there should be no IPs anywhere.

As you said, people have different tastes, so there will be a difference of opinion. If “the past was the past,” the attractions that are IP-free and still standing would be no longer.

I don't think there has been any one discussion that has been debated longer on boards like this than the inclusion of IPs...

And it'll continue long after that poster is done posting here...

 

[Californian Elitist]

So there’s no debate? You’re kidding.

You have no idea what I understand since I read many pages of this with amazement and amusement. I’m only questioning why bother, but you obviously know better so the droning continues. Have at it.

No, I know you don’t understand because you think we don’t want any IPs at all in the parks, which is false.

I already told you why we’re bothering, it’s because we want to. If you’re tired of it, oh well. Mind your own and discuss topics you want to engage in.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I don't think there has been any one discussion that has been debated longer on boards like this than the inclusion of IPs...

And it'll continue long after that poster is done posting here...

Absolutely.

 

[DanielBB8]

No, I know you don’t understand because you think we don’t want any IPs at all in the parks, which is false.

I already told you why we’re bothering, it’s because we want to. If you’re tired of it, oh well. Mind your own and discuss topics you want to engage in.

You pretty much argue IPs aren’t necessary in a theme park. It’s not that you’ll object to IP, but where it occurred, you just think IPs should be rare than a normal part of a Disney theme park. It is so obvious that you forgot it one page back.

We got Cars Land because Disney no longer has faith in anything that isn’t directly linked to movies.

Lasseter complained Car Land lacked Disney characters...yet a majority of Disneyland went years and years with really just one land that was dedicated to characters, and the park still succeeded.

History has shown Disney doesn’t need to include IPs in their parks to reach success.

With this criteria, IPs should be considered only after original ideas are exhausted. We should also presume original ideas will always be successful since it happened, but we know of numerous failures with original ideas. The idea that Disneyland succeeds when their secondary theme parks hardly ever never succeeds without IP and this fact is always in the memory hole. But keep arguing this because that’s what you do.

Even more odd, secondary theme parks were always the argument to put IPs to keep Disneyland pristine. Of course, that’s why we argue Disneyland Resort should have a third park to have Marvel and Star Wars.

History had shown original ideas can be cheap and value designed. Then IPs came to the rescue because the cost for higher quality attractions is less of a risk to the corporate treasury. Plus a ready made backstory solves related theming questions.

 

[TROR]

We’re arguing which should be the focus: storytelling or immersion. Get with the program.

 

[DanielBB8]

We’re arguing which should be the focus: storytelling or immersion. Get with the program.

Not everyone is arguing the same thing since page 4. That’s right. PAGE 4.

 

[Californian Elitist]

You pretty much argue IPs aren’t necessary in a theme park. It’s not that you’ll object to IP, but where it occurred, you just think IPs should be rare than a normal part of a Disney theme park. It is so obvious that you forgot it one page back.
With this criteria, IPs should be considered only after original ideas are exhausted. We should also presume original ideas will always be successful since it happened, but we know of numerous failures with original ideas. The idea that Disneyland succeeds when their secondary theme parks hardly ever never succeeds without IP and this fact is always in the memory hole. But keep arguing this because that’s what you do.

Even more odd, secondary theme parks were always the argument to put IPs to keep Disneyland pristine. Of course, that’s why we argue Disneyland Resort should have a third park to have Marvel and Star Wars.

History had shown original ideas can be cheap and value designed. Then IPs came to the rescue because the cost for higher quality attractions is less of a risk to the corporate treasury. Plus a ready made backstory solves related theming questions.

Again, you don’t truly understand the argument.

You’re tired of talking about it, but you want me to keep arguing?

I’m moving on now.

 

[Disney Analyst]

DCA was a mess. DCA was less messy around 2012... DCA is a mess again.

I like Carsland.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Clearly Disney parks need to be more timeless like Disney’s Hollywood Studios, a park that just turned 30 and has no opening day attractions open.

Or WDSP, the least attended Disney park in the world despite being full of IP.

 

[QuasiNoFroyo]

Clearly Disney parks need to be more timeless like Disney’s Hollywood Studios, a park that just turned 30 and has no opening day attractions open.

In my opinion, the only two Disney parks (aside from the castle parks) that I’d consider timeless would be Animal Kingdom and Tokyo DisneySea.

 

[Chupaca Bruh]

I love, love, love the SciFi Dine in at WDW but I love all those old movies. I even have a Facebook site dedicated to old monster movies. The food 5ere has been fine to very good but I never order anything fancy. I think the Classic cars Drive in restaurant would have have been a cash cow for them. While I am not as into classic cars as I am old Science Fiction movies it still would have been atmospheric and fun. They could have charged $5 - $10 more per item and I believe the restaurant would be full most if the time. I have never been sure why Disney is so resistant to more full service restaurants in the California parks.

 

[THE 1HAPPY HAUNT]

Ahem...

View attachment 375302

And what’s the biggest complaint (admittedly from online speculators, not actual guests who have been there) about Smugglers Run? That we don’t get to walk up the ramp like in the movies.

I will go to my grave saying not going up the ramp was a mistake!

 

[truecoat]

I will go to my grave saying not going up the ramp was a mistake!

It was physically impossible to make it safe without it looking way out of proportion.

 

[Ismael Flores]

It would be great to see it being resurrected but at the same time i rather them use the limited land for another attraction.

DCA is in need of more attractions and not necessarily another eatery

 

[truecoat]

It would be great to see it being resurrected but at the same time i rather them use the limited land for another attraction.

DCA is in need of more attractions and not necessarily another eatery

It does lack table service locations. Is Carthay the only table service location in the whole park?

 

[Ismael Flores]

It does lack table service locations. Is Carthay the only table service location in the whole park?

lamplight lounge and wine country tratorria are also table service

 

[Figments Friend]

Still blows my mind that they chose to literally name that land "Cars Land" instead of "Radiator Springs"

Same.
Never understood why they decided to do this.
Was it a 'branding' thing, to insure even the most clueless Guests would understand the lands' connection to a Pixar film?
Disney loves it's synergy, and I'm guessing marketing made the decision.

A shame , as 'Radiator Springs' makes a heck of a lot more sense......and is a lot more appealing name-wise in my opinion.

-

 

[socalifornian]

Same.
Never understood why they decided to do this.
Was it a 'branding' thing, to insure even the most clueless Guests would understand the lands' connection to a Pixar film?
Disney loves it's synergy, and I'm guessing marketing made the decision.

A shame , as 'Radiator Springs' makes a heck of a lot more sense......and is a lot more appealing name-wise in my opinion.

-

Maybe they can rededicate and rename again when spidey opens