News Zootopia and Moana Blue Sky concepts for Disney's Animal Kingdom

Big_Shakalaka

Big_Shakalaka

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
Honestly the Moana idea seems less lazy than the Zootopia one. Zootopia is “it has animals, so…” whereas Moana actually fits into the conservation piece like Pandora was extremely successful with. I would argue conservation is the theme of the whole park, honestly. Dinoland adds less to that overall theme than the other lands, so I don’t really mind it leaving but they can do better than Zootopia. Have the whole land become Oceania and Australia and I’d be a happy camper.

And then build Indy at DHS. Finally.

I know. Pipe dream.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Well said @ToTBellHop
 
Big_Shakalaka

Big_Shakalaka

Well-Known Member
Ismael Flores said:
I really like how the Moana area looks for DAK, it give the area a nice lush landscape and still works with the IP and park.

I am not sure about zooptopia I guess I would be ok with zootopia if they took it in a different direction form what they are doing in Shanghai. Instead of doing a city scape they really should consider one of the other more natural Biodomes that are referenced in the movie.

I would prefer the rainforest, meadowland or Tundra areas for DAK if zootopia was to go in that park

Imagine a replica of the rainforest area with tree canopies an walkways that would give some amazing views of the area. The perfect excuse to add a skyway to the park.
View attachment 666257
or why not put the land towards the back of the park and add Savanna or Sahara central.
Click to expand...
In the presentation, they specifically mentioned how cool it would be to board the train and see all the lands. I can see a scenario where you are boarding the train from a tropical land (ie an extension of Moana), then touring the various lands, then back to the tropical where you return to the moana area.
 
DCLcruiser

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
Epcot82Guy said:
Which, if done by modern management and WDI, almost certainly would have been nothing like what we got.

Let alone that the issues with Zootopia and DAK and Avatar and DAK are different.
Click to expand...
100% agree. Rohde was a special kind of Imagineer.

Yes, different issues...but both have issues. (I still want my dragon coaster!)
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Animaniac93-98 said:
If nothing else, the financial failure of The Watcher in the Woods and other experimental Disney releases from the early 80s is what convinced Ron Miller to go ahead with Touchstone which provided the bulk of Disney movie revenue for the decade.

Now that Criterion is putting out Disney titles again, perhaps they can do for Watcher what Anchor Bay wanted to do 20 years ago and release the director's cut with extensive supplemental content.
Click to expand...
Just wait and there will be a Disney+ reboot starring Dwayne Johnson.
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
JMcMahonEsq said:
If no one knows about a detail, is really "extra special?"

I mean I happen to be one of the minority of people who did know there are no public bathrooms in liberty square, and why the ground is different there and what the patterns there are for. And that the flags across main street aren't official American flags so they don't have to be taken down. I've also read Project Future and know and am interested in the history of the Parks.

But my kids don't know or care about any of those things. Nor does my wife, my bro/sis in laws, nor their kids. Nor do my neighbors or the 3 people at work that brought their families to the park, and 3 of them are DVC members. For the kids when we first started going, they knew that WDW was where Mickey lives, and Ana and Elsa. Then as they got big enough it was where you could ride Haunted Mansion and Thunder Mountain.

Those little details are basically easter eggs for a small portion of the attendees. An inside joke if you will. But people don't go to the movie for the easter eggs, they go for the explosions and battle scenes (at least if we are looking at recent history.) That's who Disney is marketing to now. They are shooting not for theme park fans, but for everyone. Disney is basically now marketing to childhood and entertainment, its almost that generic of a demographic/theme. You go to Disney b/c that is what you watched and did growing up. That is what your kids are watching now. That is what you are seeing on TV, social media, ect.
Click to expand...
All the little things (that you seem to be dismissive of) add up to a big difference that may not be well understood by the guest, but is almost immediately obvious. You list several examples, and while you may be right that any of those things on their own might not be of major consequence, but all work together to create a place that tells a cohesive story and transports the guest into the themed environment.

So they’re much more than ”basically easter egg” for uber fans. They’re the building blocks of what makes Disney any different than the carnival at your State Fair.

You might say, “Don’t get all bent out of shape over one little detail that nobody will notice.” But if you say that about too many things, you’re showing that you’re a fan of something other than theme parks.
 
WDWFREAK53

WDWFREAK53

Well-Known Member
DCLcruiser said:
100% agree. Rohde was a special kind of Imagineer.

Yes, different issues...but both have issues. (I still want my dragon coaster!)
Click to expand...

Speaking of that...I wonder if there is a way to keep DinoLand and merge it with a pseudo-Beastly Kingdom set in fantastical reality.

Current DinoLand is a research facility that created a time rover to go back to the time of the dinosaurs. A roadside carnival set up shop near it as a tourist trap for those "dino-fans."

Flipping that logic around a little...

If they built a Volcano...which housed the last known Dragon (dormant/hibernating)...which was discovered by paleontologists....that would explain why the scientists built their facility next to the volcano. Their mission is to take this newfound dragon discovery and go back in time to the age of the dinosaurs and see if they coexisted or were related in some way. There could be a walk-through attraction set up like a museum which showcases both dinosaurs and dragons and blurs the lines between fantasy and reality. The end of the walkthrough could be an excursion down into the volcano to see the sleeping dragon.

Dinosaur could be rethemed in story to go back and see if Dragons and dinosaurs coexisted.

The Volcano could be a hybrid water/coaster themed to a mission to retrieve samples to see why the dragon remained alive in this dormant state for so many years...but come to find out, the volcano is the breeding ground and it's filled with dragons just waiting for the volcano to erupt and free them.
 
yensidtlaw1969

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
_caleb said:
I mean, I’ve not done a comprehensive study or anything. But you’ve been on all the D23 threads. Shall I provide a list of folks who are negative about pretty much everything they‘ve announced? Have you visited the Disneyland boards?

And I don’t think people who disagree with me are delusional. I just wonder what they’re fans of.
Click to expand...
Typically I find they're fans of Disney's standards - the ones Disney set and is choosing not to live up to.
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Epcot82Guy said:
Agreed. Beastly Kingdom as a whole would be amazing - as would Dark Mountain at MK, anchoring a Villains land.
Click to expand...
Interesting that you’d mention Beastly Kingdom here, because I think it’s a good example of what Disney has learned about the fan base, and why they’ve decided to engage in a bit of “Blue Sky chatter as marketing.“

While Beastly Kingdom was originally planned to be part of AK, and got cut, it’s a concept that lives on (and has grown) in the minds of fans like us (and the entire marketing ecosystem of vlogs, blogs, and Instafluencers). How many fan sites have done some version of “Have you ever noticed that there’s a dragon in the AK park logo?!”

Now, they’re creating the cheapest but most virulent “content” for us to consume: pure armchair Imagineering. Just watch all the free publicity Disney will gain from this one presentation. And it cost them nothing but the future disappointment of fans who can’t differentiate between “Blue Sky” and an actual announcement of plans for the parks.
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
yensidtlaw1969 said:
Typically I find they're fans of Disney's standards - the ones Disney set and is choosing not to live up to.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I think I’d put myself in the category.

But it’s confusing when some of those same people make comments like:
JMcMahonEsq said:
If no one knows about a detail, is really "extra special?"
Click to expand...
or
Jrb1979 said:
Agreed. It's why it doesn't make sense to make these ridiculous backstories for many rides. Your average guest doesn't care about it.
Click to expand...
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom