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

UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
FigmentFan82 said:
Not at all, go back to the film, the movie has many intense and action filled moments, many specifically being on a boat and in the water.
Click to expand...

That's not the point -- most Disney films have intense moments.

This is a theme park attraction, and the main audience for Moana is kids. It doesn't make a lot of sense to build a ride that a significant portion of the intended audience can't ride. Physical intensity (that will require height restrictions) is different than an intense movie scene.

Again, this is speculation because all we have is a patent (and who knows if they will even use it). But Animal Kingdom doesn't really need more height restricted attractions at all at the moment, and they certainly don't need to build a height restricted Disney princess attraction.
 
uncle jimmy

uncle jimmy

Premium Member
UNCgolf said:
That's not the point -- most Disney films have intense moments.

This is a theme park attraction, and the main audience for Moana is kids. It doesn't make a lot of sense to build a ride that a significant portion of the intended audience can't ride. Physical intensity is different than an intense movie scene.

Again, this is speculation because all we have is a patent (and who knows if they will even use it). But Animal Kingdom doesn't need more height restricted attractions at all at the moment, and they certainly don't need to build a height restricted Disney princess film.
Click to expand...
From the patents pictures we all think it's for Moana couldn't this ride and tech be used for another ride, something for a villain?
 
FigmentFan82

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
That's not the point -- most Disney films have intense moments.

This is a theme park attraction, and the main audience for Moana is kids. It doesn't make a lot of sense to build a ride that a significant portion of the intended audience can't ride. Physical intensity is different than an intense movie scene.

Again, this is speculation because all we have is a patent (and who knows if they will even use it). But Animal Kingdom doesn't really need more height restricted attractions at all at the moment, and they certainly don't need to build a height restricted Disney princess attraction.
Click to expand...
It is the point, watering down this IP wouldn't make sense. It is far more action-oriented than many other Disney films. Just the reality of the film. That said intensity doesn't need to automatically restrict your audience, but at the same time you don't specifically need to cater to a very young group. Just because there aren't a lot of "rides" for the littles at AK doesn't mean there's nothing for them to do. The park itself is joy to simply walk around and take in.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
FigmentFan82 said:
It is the point, watering down this IP wouldn't make sense. It is far more action-oriented than many other Disney films. Just the reality of the film. That said intensity doesn't need to automatically restrict your audience, but at the same time you don't specifically need to cater to a very young group. Just because there aren't a lot of "rides" for the littles at AK doesn't mean there's nothing for them to do. The park itself is joy to simply walk around and take in.
Click to expand...

It's not watering down the IP. You can build a ride with intense scenes that doesn't have height restricted physical intensity. This patent would restrict the audience. That's not a smart business decision for the Moana IP; you don't build a ride that eliminates a lot of the target audience.

A ride like this would make more sense for a different IP.
 
FigmentFan82

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
It's not watering down the IP. You can build a ride with intense scenes that doesn't have height restricted physical intensity. This patent would restrict the audience. That's not a smart business decision for the Moana IP; you don't build a ride that eliminates a lot of the target audience.

A ride like this would make more sense for a different IP.
Click to expand...
you're guessing and speculating.

Moana fits this well. doubt this would great hamper the audience
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
If it lands at a 40” requirement, that’s the average…4-year old?

I don’t think Moana is geared toward 3-year olds personally. They’d be scared and confused.

If they build a Mickey Mouse Clubhouse coaster with inversions, sure. That would be a miss.

I didn’t think the Stitch issue was the 40” requirement. It was that the harnesses and show traumatized 4-year olds.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
If it lands at a 40” requirement, that’s the average…4-year old?

I don’t think Moana is geared toward 3-year olds personally. They’d be scared and confused.

If they build a Mickey Mouse Clubhouse coaster with inversions, sure. That would be a miss.

I didn’t think the Stitch issue was the 40” requirement. It was that the harnesses and show traumatized 4-year olds.
Click to expand...

My assumption is that it would be higher than 40", considering Splash is 40" and doesn't have intense rocking.

Regardless, it's not about the height restriction alone. You generally aren't trying to scare 5 year olds with physical intensity. It also seems like it might require some kind of restraint to make sure people don't fall out when it rocks.
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
My assumption is that it would be higher than 40", considering Splash is 40" and doesn't have intense rocking.

Regardless, it's not about the height restriction alone. You generally aren't trying to scare 5 year olds with physical intensity. It also seems like it might require some kind of restraint to make sure people don't fall out when it rocks.
Click to expand...
4-year olds will be riding Dinosaur right before this. Mine road Dinosaur at 4…

Hell, they road Pirates at 7 months. Ever ridden that drop into the turn at the bottom in an off-balance boat? Like driving through the mountains of Jamaica. I was so nervous that they had to swab the deck after we got off the ride!
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
My assumption is that it would be higher than 40", considering Splash is 40" and doesn't have intense rocking.

Regardless, it's not about the height restriction alone. You generally aren't trying to scare 5 year olds with physical intensity. It also seems like it might require some kind of restraint to make sure people don't fall out when it rocks.
Click to expand...
what makes you so sure that the range of motion means violent rocking? There is nothing that specifically says that it will rock so violently as to throw people from the boat... It is just a patent for an idea.... showing motion range... that is like looking at the Omnimover patent and assuming it will be a tilt-a-whirl that will spin guests like an out of control teacup... We have no idea what this is at this point, and yes it points to Moana... and I would assume they know their audience and at this stage don't need to worry about toddlers on a yet unnamed, unbuilt idea for a patent. If it is aimed at a more mature audience, then it is... Not every single attraction needs to be tooled down for infants.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
4-year olds will be riding Dinosaur right before this. Mine road Dinosaur at 4…

Hell, they road Pirates at 7 months. Ever ridden that drop into the turn at the bottom in an off-balance boat? Like driving through the mountains of Jamaica. I was so nervous that they had to swab the deck after we got off the ride!
Click to expand...
This calls out to the need for a flume ride in DAK. Don't get me wrong, I actually think that the Moana / Oceania area would be a solid addition, but the park needs a couple more rides without height requirements.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
Sure. I would put this ride at DHS, which seriously needs a water ride and where the IP would be supported by all.
Click to expand...
I'm in favor of a flume ride in DHS, I'm less in favor of Moana in DHS because DHS is often the catch all for a bunch of IP. Moana has story treatments that would work in the other 3 parks. How about a non-height requirement water ride for Moana in DAK, and an Indiana Jones flume in DHS?
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
Moana would be a stretch at DHS... The park doesn't have any space that feels like it is leaning towards pacific island culture...it just feels wrong for the park... Much like Moana feels wrong for EPCOT. DAK feels like a natural place for a Pacific Island/Oceana area to exist which would fit the "Exotic Travel" framework of the park rather than be a complete departure...
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
Moana would be a stretch at DHS... The park doesn't have any space that feels like it is leaning towards pacific island culture...it just feels wrong for the park... Much like Moana feels wrong for EPCOT. DAK feels like a natural place for a Pacific Island/Oceana area to exist which would fit the "Exotic Travel" framework of the park rather than be a complete departure...
Click to expand...
I would put it in a fleshed-out Animation Courtyard (replacing Launch Bay) with some sort of Walt Disney Animation Studios stage show replacing Mermaid.

Not that any of this matters. DHS is apparently all set through 2030.

Of course, Chapek’s firing throws all of this into question.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
Haymarket2008 said:
A Moana mini land belongs in Magic Kingdom.

Losing the element of dinosaurs is detrimental to the theme of Animal Kingdom.

Imho.
Click to expand...
no need to lose the dinosaurs...condense them around the Dinosaur attraction, build the Moana/ Oceana area in what used to be Chester and Hester's area...no reason we can't have both. The carnival area is not integral to the Dinosaur portion of The Animal Kingdom...but was added filler when the park felt light. when you look at Google Earth you see that the Dinoland Area is larger than Pandor...almost twice as large... If they moved the Boneyard, opened up the waterfront near Restaurantosaurus and made some modifications, it could be a more concentrated and probably more engaging land... Then that leaves a large piece of property to create the whole new land and a large attraction...and to have Oceana/Moana connected to the Nemo theater just makes sense...
If we add anything to Magic Kingdome, Mystic Manor and Mystic Point would be a lovely addition...and theme-appropriate.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom